Jump to content

Coronavirus


1of4
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, jono said:

Why is it incompetent to suggest prompt action. Something Burnham is hampering for his own selfish political gain. 

As far as I understand it Jono, the government offered £60m to Manchester, in line with the amounts they'd offered Liverpool and Lancashire.

Burnham wanted £70m, but said he would settle for £65m at a push.

The government walked away, and is now proposing £22m, which is obviously far below on a pro rata basis what they've offered elsewhere.

Why should the subjects of Manchester receive less help than other regions, and less than they were offered only hours earlier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, reverendo de duivel said:

As far as I understand it Jono, the government offered £60m to Manchester, in line with the amounts they'd offered Liverpool and Lancashire.

Burnham wanted £70m, but said he would settle for £65m at a push.

The government walked away, and is now proposing £22m, which is obviously far below on a pro rata basis what they've offered elsewhere.

Why should the subjects of Manchester receive less help than other regions, and less than they were offered only hours earlier?

The 60m offer is still on the table

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said:

The 60m offer is still on the table

Dont you just wish that both sides would stop acting like petulant little 'look at me' children and just strike a deal.

Seems ludicrous to be stalling over 5 million in the grand scheme of things, you sort of think that 5 million is more than pound notes its about not being seen to be the loser (on both sides)....just ducking make it 62.50 and have done with it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

@GboroRam glad to see that you thing people losing their lives work and people being made redundant is so funny.

Class as always.

I'm finding it funny that you think there's no scientific evidence to support extra measures to help safety, despite the death rate going up still. I also find it funny that you suggest we listen to TalkSport for balanced reporting! You keep me rolling in the aisles.

And you really need to stop this virtue signalling, and implying that I support extra mental health problems, more cancer deaths etc. As I've said I don't think a lockdown would work because there's so many people sceptical of the measures (such as yourself), so we're stuck with a long, grim, continuous death rate. The failure to tackle this virus will result in all the things you fear anyway, because there will end up being too much demand on the NHS, which will cause mental health services to fail, cancer deaths to rise due to a failure to diagnose, the economy will crash due to the number of people isolating, being hospitalised or dying from this illness. 

Between a rock and a hard place. I'm prepared to support measures I think have a hope of getting us back to normality fastest, you don't believe they will work (I actually agree, but for different reasons). No need to virtue signal. We both want the best outcome, but disagree how it could be achieved. @Albert has offered reasons why getting the virus under control is the best possible approach, but nobody has any counter-argument that sinks his evidence. And you can't stand that he's run rings around your arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I'm finding it funny that you think there's no scientific evidence to support extra measures to help safety, despite the death rate going up still. I also find it funny that you suggest we listen to TalkSport for balanced reporting! You keep me rolling in the aisles.

And you really need to stop this virtue signalling, and implying that I support extra mental health problems, more cancer deaths etc. As I've said I don't think a lockdown would work because there's so many people sceptical of the measures (such as yourself), so we're stuck with a long, grim, continuous death rate. The failure to tackle this virus will result in all the things you fear anyway, because there will end up being too much demand on the NHS, which will cause mental health services to fail, cancer deaths to rise due to a failure to diagnose, the economy will crash due to the number of people isolating, being hospitalised or dying from this illness. 

Between a rock and a hard place. I'm prepared to support measures I think have a hope of getting us back to normality fastest, you don't believe they will work (I actually agree, but for different reasons). No need to virtue signal. We both want the best outcome, but disagree how it could be achieved. @Albert has offered reasons why getting the virus under control is the best possible approach, but nobody has any counter-argument that sinks his evidence. And you can't stand that he's run rings around your arguments.

I dont remember suggesting you listen to talksport.

You do realise though that to get a balanced view you may have to listen to things that you are uncomfortable listening to? I know that probably wont go down too well in your echo chamber.

I've not virtue signalled or suggested that you support deaths from other causes, I've just pointed out that these may happen, not sure how you interpret that as you supporting deaths. Well we know you dont really, it's just the usual hyperbole to try and support a weak argument.

If you think nobody has offered any counter arguments to what Albert says then I can only assume that you must have blocked half of the people on this thread. 

I dont mind having my him run rings round my arguments, the fact is though that he ignores anything that goes against his thought process and comes back with the same argument again and again, obviously buoyed by the fact that posters like you lap it all up.

I'll await his scientific evidence on why our adult gaming centre has been closed down and how things like that are not contributing to the economy failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nope I'm using the phrase scientific evidence as the Government tell us we are being guided by the science. We aren't. 

Example. The business I work for operates a 24 hour adult gaming centre.

We now have to close between 10pm and 5am.

Result, our takings for that site are 40% down and 1 or 2 members of staff are facing redundancy. 

Between the hours of 10pm and 5am customer numbers are 4 or 5 at one time.

We spent tens of thousands on measures making sure the venue is safe, providing masks for customers, perspex sheets between machines, which are cleaned every time someone has finished playing on them.

A business being hampered for absolutely zero effect.

Surely you can see this situation is useless government rather than useless science?

The government just abdicating responsibility time and time again.

Then we have other charlatans pushing that there is no danger and we should just open back up as normal and implement some magic shield that will somehow protect the millions at risk, even when the rest of the country has it. 

The choice doesn't have to be between farcical lockdown rules and pretending there is no danger.

Nothing is working anyway, over 20p deaths reported yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I dont remember suggesting you listen to talksport.

You do realise though that to get a balanced view you may have to listen to things that you are uncomfortable listening to? I know that probably wont go down too well in your echo chamber.

It's interesting that you say this, given that your views seem to be entirely reinforced by pushing the same narrative against the weight of evidence. 

22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've not virtue signalled or suggested that you support deaths from other causes, I've just pointed out that these may happen, not sure how you interpret that as you supporting deaths. Well we know you dont really, it's just the usual hyperbole to try and support a weak argument.

You have made comments that heavily imply that, if I recall. This comment by you is an example of the kind of thing they're referring to:

11 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

@GboroRam glad to see that you thing people losing their lives work and people being made redundant is so funny.

Class as always.

22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

If you think nobody has offered any counter arguments to what Albert says then I can only assume that you must have blocked half of the people on this thread. 

I dont mind having my him run rings round my arguments, the fact is though that he ignores anything that goes against his thought process and comes back with the same argument again and again, obviously buoyed by the fact that posters like you lap it all up.

What counters do you believe there have been? Also, what points do you think I've ignored? I have examples of you ducking and dodging questions, but I'd be curious to see what you think I've ignored. 

22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'll await his scientific evidence on why our adult gaming centre has been closed down and how things like that are not contributing to the economy failing.

You'll notice that I'm not arguing for the government's current bits and pieces approach. This is just you attempting to strawman my position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ariotofmyown said:

Surely you can see this situation is useless government rather than useless science?

The government just abdicating responsibility time and time again.

Then we have other charlatans pushing that there is no danger and we should just open back up as normal and implement some magic shield that will somehow protect the millions at risk, even when the rest of the country has it. 

The choice doesn't have to be between farcical lockdown rules and pretending there is no danger.

Nothing is working anyway, over 20p deaths reported yesterday.

Useless Government is definitely part of it.

Do you not believe they are following any advice from scientists then?

Do you think they have just sat there and come up with the idea to close pubs early, close casinos and gyms etc?

I've not seen anyone on any platform say there is no danger but happy for you to prove me wrong with a few links.

Shielding worked between April and July, how come all of a sudden it's no longer viable?

I'm yet to see any response about the 27,000 excess deaths in private homes this year that were not Covid related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like @G STAR RAM and @GboroRam are fighting out a closely contested Semi for the privilege of facing @Albert in the Final.

 

Right now @G STAR RAM is pushing @GboroRam up the park, playing a pressing game, dazzling the latter's midfield with sparkling footwork involving references to talksport and has just used a new cool big word - hyperbole, which arced over the goal drawing gasps from the onlooking coaching staffs..

@G STAR RAM, resplendent in a sharp suit, shouts to his players from the touchline.

Meanwhile @GboroRam an old fashioned manager in a sheepskin coat with dried egg down the front, strikes an imposing figure.

 

Its all to play for as the October rain pelts down.

 

🙂

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Hang on a minute why would we want to be passing this burden to the NHS? I've heard on many occasions that it is already being overwhelmed and on the verge of collapse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Useless Government is definitely part of it.

I know this isn't for me, but I might as well respond. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Do you not believe they are following any advice from scientists then?

No. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Do you think they have just sat there and come up with the idea to close pubs early, close casinos and gyms etc?

No, I expect panels of people are discussing responses that will make it look like they're doing something, while not harming their donors pockets yet. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've not seen anyone on any platform say there is no danger but happy for you to prove me wrong with a few links.

Define no danger. Some on here have definitely implied that this is no worse than a bad flu season, some even tried to argue it's not even that. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Shielding worked between April and July, how come all of a sudden it's no longer viable?

Too many cases now. It's easier to shield without wild uncontrolled community transmission. 

10 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'm yet to see any response about the 27,000 excess deaths in private homes this year that were not Covid related.

Probably because when people asked for context you ducked out. I've found ONS report on it now. They suggest it's a redistribution from hospitals, which is a knock-on effect of the pandemic. This is exactly the kind of thing we've all been concerned about, and one the key points in my argument for why control of the pandemic is so important. Below is the statisticians comment:

Quote

“While deaths in hospitals and care homes have dropped below the five-year average since the initial peak of the coronavirus pandemic, we’ve consistently seen deaths in private homes remain well above the five-year average."

"We have seen an overall increase of deaths as well as a redistribution of various causes of death. For instance, while deaths of heart disease are below average in hospital, it has been above average at home. It’s a similar picture when looking at prostate cancer for males and Dementia and Alzheimer's disease for females. Unlike the high numbers of deaths involving COVID-19 in hospitals and care homes, the majority of deaths in private homes are unrelated to COVID-19."

Sarah Caul, Head of Mortality Analysis

For England, the total figure is 23,136, which is 22% above the 5 year average. There were 2,358 deaths counted as being due to Covid. 11,177 of the excess occurred during April and May, and since then the number of excess deaths has remained fairly constant. This is consistent with the statisticians thoughts about this being due to a redistribution, though their position is also based on the other data they have at hand too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Example. The business I work for operates a 24 hour adult gaming centre.

We now have to close between 10pm and 5am.

Result, our takings for that site are 40% down and 1 or 2 members of staff are facing redundancy. 

Between the hours of 10pm and 5am customer numbers are 4 or 5 at one time.

We spent tens of thousands on measures making sure the venue is safe, providing masks for customers, perspex sheets between machines, which are cleaned every time someone has finished playing on them.

A business being hampered for absolutely zero effect.

Not exactly zero effect though is it, if it's keeping the staff safe.

Comes back to what we were saying yesterday - being anti-lockdown is as daft as being pro-lockdown.

What would you say if those measures weren't in place and the virus ran riot - all the staff caught it and then the business had to close for weeks with everyone in isolation, or in ICU, or worse? You can't even say "it's worth it to keep the economy going" because it will have had the exact opposite effect

 

Edited by SchtivePesley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Albert said:

It's interesting that you say this, given that your views seem to be entirely reinforced by pushing the same narrative against the weight of evidence. 

You have made comments that heavily imply that, if I recall. This comment by you is an example of the kind of thing they're referring to:

What counters do you believe there have been? Also, what points do you think I've ignored? I have examples of you ducking and dodging questions, but I'd be curious to see what you think I've ignored. 

You'll notice that I'm not arguing for the government's current bits and pieces approach. This is just you attempting to strawman my position. 

I've listened to arguments from both sides and reached my conclusion. This is unlike other posters who dismiss opposing views because they dont like the people saying them. Theres a big difference.

I didn't imply the poster was supporting deaths. I just don't see how posting a laughing emoji to a serious post about people losing their jobs can be construed as anything other than them finding it funny? Unless the emoji is just being used because of the person posting, and I know personal attacks are not welcome on this forum so it must be the former. 

If you've not seen any counter arguments it just reinforces my view that you dont read any replies and just set about posting your pre conceived responses.

You said the economy is being trashed because of the virus not being under control, I'm just pointing out that business that are clearly not a part of the virus spreading are being closed down and it is things like this unnecessarily trashing the economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Not exactly zero effect though is it, if it's keeping the staff safe.

Comes back to what we were saying yesterday - being anti-lockdown is as daft as being pro-lockdown.

What would you say if those measures weren't in place and the virus ran riot - all the staff caught it and then the business had to close for weeks with everyone in isolation, or in ICU, or worse? You can't even say "it's worth it to keep the economy going" because it will have had the exact opposite effect

Everyone on the premises has to wear a mask, that keeps you safe right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we're ducked financially;

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/uk-borrowing-exceeds-forecasts-debt-highest-since-1960-2020-10-21

Our national debt has risen again to 103.5% of GDP as a result of Government spending and less taxes being collected - and thats been over the summer months, when the country has been largely open.

Assuming we're in and out of lockdowns all through winter with people either losing jobs or being put on the new (lower paying) furlough scheme, not only is Christmas going to be joyless but its going to be extremely frugal.

A lot of businesses rely on Christmas to make a good chunk of their yearly sales, if people are simply struggling to exist or scared to spend you can only begin to imagine what our finances will look like in March and catastrophic effect it will begin to have on us all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've listened to arguments from both sides and reached my conclusion. This is unlike other posters who dismiss opposing views because they dont like the people saying them

Christ my irony sphincter is twitching like a good 'un this morning. You habitually disagree with me for no other reason than it's me saying it. If you bothered to read my posts last week you'd see that I have a pretty balanced view on this - I'm even largely on the same page as @maxjamand that's rarer than a Derby goal.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SchtivePesley said:

Christ my irony sphincter is twitching like a good 'un this morning. You habitually disagree with me for no other reason than it's me saying it. If you bothered to read my posts last week you'd see that I have a pretty balanced view on this - I'm even largely on the same page as @maxjamand that's rarer than a Derby goal.

I know, can you stop liking some of my posts please its starting to get weird 😛

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.