Coronavirus

[sage]

54 minutes ago, Andicis said:

I'm of the opinion the Government doesn't much care about anyone and lockdown is popular amongst the older demographics that are more likely to die. 

FTFY

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, sage said:

FTFY

Doesn't really make sense.

You're saying they don't care about anyone yet they are locking down the whole country, risking the jobs and mental health of millions, to save the lives of a very small minority. 

[Albert]

10 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Strange to pick out the UK as being the country 'bottling the handling of the pandemic'. Some may even suggest you're being a WUM.

Given how abysmally the UK is doing, and the impact it's having on people's lives, I find it strange that you'd suggest they're not a good example to focus on, particularly given they're the topic of this very discussion. 

Given the content you post, it's also unusual that your new method is just to call people WUMs; is this your way of covering for all the things you've said in the past that time has shown to be incorrect? 

[GenBr]

7 hours ago, Andicis said:

I'm of the opinion the Government doesn't much care about the young who will pay for this lockdown, and lockdown is popular amongst the older demographics that vote for them. 

Any democratic government is inevitably going to have a short term mindset due to the limits on their terms. If the government wanted to please it's core demographics they wouldn't have any lockdown at all and they certainly wouldn't be doing anything that could damage the economy. I doubt very much that large portions of the younger population want lockdown to end either - most people are empathetic to those at risk and quite frankly from a purely selfish perspective a lot of us love working from home. From my perspective do whatever it takes until the virus is under control.  

I would also add that older voters were paying back the UK's World War 2 debts until 2006. Whilst I will be paying additional taxes towards Covid for another 50 years I don't expect them to be any harsher than the seniors had to deal with through the late 20th century.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Albert said:

Given how abysmally the UK is doing, and the impact it's having on people's lives, I find it strange that you'd suggest they're not a good example to focus on, particularly given they're the topic of this very discussion. 

Given the content you post, it's also unusual that your new method is just to call people WUMs; is this your way of covering for all the things you've said in the past that time has shown to be incorrect? 

7th most cases, 37th most cases per 1m population.

Speaking of incorrect content did you ever back down on your point about tax that I took to pieces?

[Albert]

29 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

7th most cases, 37th most cases per 1m population.

In the top 10 for most deaths per capita. I wouldn't say being in the bottom 40 countries is exactly a glowing review either. 

29 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Speaking of incorrect content did you ever back down on your point about tax that I took to pieces?

The one I wasn't wrong about. It's interesting that weeks later you're clinging to that as some kind of life raft. Maybe in future, start with a good argument, and avoid the cheap attempts at gotchas. Or, at the very least, if you're going to do one, at least do it properly. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Albert said:

In the top 10 for most deaths per capita. I wouldn't say being in the bottom 40 countries is exactly a glowing review either. 

The one I wasn't wrong about. It's interesting that weeks later you're clinging to that as some kind of life raft. Maybe in future, start with a good argument, and avoid the cheap attempts at gotchas. Or, at the very least, if you're going to do one, at least do it properly. 

So why didnt you choose any of the other 10?

Ok forget tax one, we all know that you would never admit to being wrong?

How about life being back to normal in Australia? Despite the fact your borders are closed and still need to have lockdowns?

Not clinging to anything but if you're going to go on about incorrect content, expect to be pulled up on your own cases of it.

[Albert]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

So why didnt you choose any of the other 10?

This is the UK based forum, and the UK's response has been abysmal. The topic of discussion here is Covid-19 in the UK, why would I start going on about Spain or Belgium? 

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Ok forget tax one, we all know that you would never admit to being wrong?

I've admitted to my errors when they've occurred. Why is this your response to being called out? 

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

How about life being back to normal in Australia? Despite the fact your borders are closed and still need to have lockdowns?

No lockdown here in SA right now, some parts of Sydney are though. Life is pretty damn normal though, and the economy is recovering well. All that, with very few deaths since April (none here). Seems a pretty sweet deal. 

[Eddie]

Hospital cases now higher than they were in April, and still rising.

The only consolation is that many more of those hospitalised this time will survive compared to those who did during the first wave.

[Albert]

Just now, Eddie said:

Hospital cases now higher than they were in April, and still rising.

The only consolation is that many more of those hospitalised this time will survive compared to those who did during the first wave.

Has this been confirmed? The trend, as discussed in the quote below, made it look like Christmas day or Boxing day was likely, but the current data on the dashboard only goes to the 22nd, and while it's close, it hadn't exceeded April at that point. 

On 19/12/2020 at 10:58, Albert said:

It's getting worrying at this point. 

Taking into account patients leaving hospital, the trend at the moment is about 330 new patients per day, and the new admission are on the rise. Even assuming that it remains constant though, it's not going to be long before the first wave is eclipsed. 

The last release of data put the figure at 18,469 on the 16th, while the absolute peak was 21,683 on the 12th of April. The current trend would put the day that this wave sees more people in hospital is on either Christmas day or Boxing day. 

Mechanical ventilation beds is a bit more positive, with this second wave being no where near that first wave yet. That said, occupation of beds is still on the rise after dipped due to the most recent lockdown. 

 

[Eddie]

9 minutes ago, Albert said:

Has this been confirmed? The trend, as discussed in the quote below, made it look like Christmas day or Boxing day was likely, but the current data on the dashboard only goes to the 22nd, and while it's close, it hadn't exceeded April at that point. 

 

"NHS England said the number of people being treated for the virus in hospital is now 20,426, which is higher than the previous peak of about 19,000 in April."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55462701

[Andicis]

1 hour ago, GenBr said:

If the government wanted to please it's core demographics they wouldn't have any lockdown at all and they certainly wouldn't be doing anything that could damage the economy.

Not sure we agree on this. It tends to be the older people with larger homes that are the least impacted by lockdown, therefore I'd say the Tory core are probably comfortable enough being locked down.

 

1 hour ago, GenBr said:

I doubt very much that large portions of the younger population want lockdown to end either

Not so sure that you're correct on this. 

[Albert]

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

"NHS England said the number of people being treated for the virus in hospital is now 20,426, which is higher than the previous peak of about 19,000 in April."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55462701

Ah, so confirmed for England. Will almost certainly be confirmed for the whole UK in the next day or two, though thankfully we're not to the same level of ventilator use as earlier in the year. 

[Albert]

3 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Not sure we agree on this. It tends to be the older people with larger homes that are the least impacted by lockdown, therefore I'd say the Tory core are probably comfortable enough being locked down.

 

Not so sure that you're correct on this. 

The lessons learned from other countries is that you don't need a political slant on this stuff. Lockdowns are non-ideal, but they're the hammer that works when things get bad. Best practice involves avoiding them, but with effective, earlier responses. The UK didn't do that, so this is where things are. 

Here in Australia, the public health measures, including use of lockdowns earlier in the years, and sporadically as an early response since, have received broad bipartisan support. This is because such actions have benefitted everyone in this. 

There's no need to have this 'us versus them' attitude to it all. Depending on how you want to paint the picture, you could argue that 'Tories have enough to survive the lockdown', while young people 'just want time off anyhow'. You can argue it either way, but the reality is that the cross section of the population is far more complicated and diverse than that. 

The reality is that lockdowns impact everyone, and the key is that when used, the government need to provide support to help smooth those issues out. This, realistically, can only happen when lockdowns are part of a broad and well considered strategy though, as long rolling lockdowns would be too expensive when using that otherwise. Unfortunately, this is the situation that the UK has reached, and providing support is now costly on every side, but the situation has spiraled too far out of control. If not the vaccine being here already, this situation would be even more dire. Hopefully, the rollout is effective. 

[Andicis]

11 minutes ago, Albert said:

The lessons learned from other countries is that you don't need a political slant on this stuff.

Lockdowns are inherently political.

14 minutes ago, Albert said:

You can argue it either way, but the reality is that the cross section of the population is far more complicated and diverse than that. 

Correct. 

 

15 minutes ago, Albert said:

The reality is that lockdowns impact everyone, and the key is that when used, the government need to provide support to help smooth those issues out.

But they don't impact everyone equally. This is the point I'm making. 

[Norman]

Covid cases.

Japan at 4,000 a day, South Korea at 1,000 cases a day, Russia at levels similar to us.

Mongolia, Taiwan etc with a handful of cases. Even Nepal. 

But China. China have managed to keep it at 20 odd a day, despite the cases being 100's and 100's of miles apart. 

Yeah right. 

[Albert]

46 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Lockdowns are inherently political.

They're not, they're just a type of public health response. That's the thing, they're apolitical, and countries that haven't tried to muddy things with petty politics have done better because of this. 

46 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Correct. 

 

But they don't impact everyone equally. This is the point I'm making. 

Which is why government support that goes with them need to be targeted at supporting groups that are adversely impacted. 

45 minutes ago, Norman said:

Covid cases.

Japan at 4,000 a day, South Korea at 1,000 cases a day, Russia at levels similar to us.

Mongolia, Taiwan etc with a handful of cases. Even Nepal. 

But China. China have managed to keep it at 20 odd a day, despite the cases being 100's and 100's of miles apart. 

Yeah right. 

China is a massive country, having 20 odd cases a day isn't unreasonable, particularly with people moving about. 

[Andicis]

27 minutes ago, Albert said:

They're not, they're just a type of public health response. That's the thing, they're apolitical, and countries that haven't tried to muddy things with petty politics have done better because of this. 

Albert, they are absolutely not apolitical. There is a very real political debate behind it. Maybe not in China where you don't stop to ask, but generally in democracies when you make such huge decisions, it is political...

[Albert]

26 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Albert, they are absolutely not apolitical. There is a very real political debate behind it. Maybe not in China where you don't stop to ask, but generally in democracies when you make such huge decisions, it is political...

It's not a debate here in Australia, nor was it in New Zealand, and we don't have non-democratic tripe like the house of Lords. 

It's only political when reactionary opportunists take hold, and that's only because anything can be political in those circumstances. 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Albert said:

This is the UK based forum, and the UK's response has been abysmal. The topic of discussion here is Covid-19 in the UK, why would I start going on about Spain or Belgium? 

Pennies dropped.

For the same reasons that you've been going on about Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan on the UK based forum for the last 9 months?