Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (28 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

Remember people quoting this guy like he was definitely ITK and all over it.

Told you he was a crank.

People need to stop getting blinded by personalities and look at the medical profession as a whole. There will always be cranks in any field looking for publicity by saying what people want to hear.

 

---

[clint van damme]

Told you he was a crank.

People need to stop getting blinded by personalities and look at the medical profession as a whole. There will always be cranks in any field looking for publicity by saying what people want to hear.

When he started getting a bit of a rep I googled what other medical professionals said about him, they weren't too complimentary, that was enough for me. Think the general perception was he had no experience in the epidemiology field which he was commenting about regularly.

One thing that's became really evident is that in a situation like the pandemic people are desperate for a positive narrative when all they're seeing is bad news, (nothing wrong with that), but that allows people like this to be given a higher profile than they deserve.

 

[Skybluefaz]

 

[CCFCSteve]

This is just nonsense British exceptionalism. Our numbers are valid, everyone else’s are dodgy. It’s nonsense.

Same as the China stuff. Do you realise the level of data they released? They were slow to admit it but once the cat was out the bag they’ve been very helpful. Meanwhile we’ve been chopping and changing our data collection methods based on what’s polticially expedient.

You can say why weve done the worse but you can’t deny we have. There will be no magic reckoning in the future where we are found to be the best.



Less Britain First and more Britain At Least We Aren’t Last.

Can’t even do nationalism properly.

‘Slow to admit’ is a bit of an understatement shmmeee. The cover up was disgraceful and has led to a worldwide issue that may (nobody will know for sure) have been containable.

We have fucked up various things during the outbreak (as have a number of countries), but China’s behaviour is on a different level

 

[shmmeee]

‘Slow to admit’ is a bit of an understatement shmmeee. The cover up was disgraceful and has led to a worldwide issue that may (nobody will know for sure) have been containable.

We have fucked up various things during the outbreak (as have a number of countries), but China’s behaviour is on a different level

Not sure this contradicts what I said. But again since the “cover up” they’ve been extremely helpful to the scientific community.

You can’t just keep harping back to the spilt milk.

 

[CCFCSteve]

Not sure this contradicts what I said. But again since the “cover up” they’ve been extremely helpful to the scientific community.

You can’t just keep harping back to the spilt milk.

hmmm, I know they might have been ‘helpful’, I should think so !

i see their conduct as a little bit more serious I guess

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The same reason 5k deaths was removed of the total toll, no idea why they put cause as covid but they have been doing so as I've said its now cause of death is heart failure not heart failure with covid as a factor, I shoukd of mentioned he was in hospital for a good 3/4 weeks before his death.

I'm sorry for your loss.

Someone dying of heart failure could also be linked to Covid though. It affects the ability of the body to absorb oxygen. Less oxygen means the heart beats faster to try and get sufficient oxygen. This puts extra pressure on an already weak heart.

It may well have been his death would've occurred anyway but Covid had an effect on how quickly he died.

For example a lot of people with conditions like cancer and AIDS die for completely different things, pneumonia being very common. However, the weakness to the immune system due to the underlying conditions was a major factor in their death. So pneumonia is the cause of death with cancer as a factor in it.

 

[David O'Day]

I'm sorry for your loss.

Someone dying of heart failure could also be linked to Covid though. It affects the ability of the body to absorb oxygen. Less oxygen means the heart beats faster to try and get sufficient oxygen. This puts extra pressure on an already weak heart.

It may well have been his death would've occurred anyway but Covid had an effect on how quickly he died.

For example a lot of people with conditions like cancer and AIDS die for completely different things, pneumonia being very common. However, the weakness to the immune system due to the underlying conditions was a major factor in their death. So pneumonia is the cause of death with cancer as a factor in it.

Viruses are also responsible for Myocarditis which can lead to heart failure.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

It's only gone over 50% because of Johnson

It has been on the rise since the referendum for a few reasons.

First things was after Cameron made all these promises and then as soon as they voted no the conversation turned almost instantly onto the effect on England.

Brexit also had an effect, voting Remain yet the UK as a whole voted to leave. Their voice once again overridden by England

Then there's Johnson who despite claiming to be a one-nation Tory has done more to assist the breakup of the union than anyone before him with his Irish border plans and just general impression of England being the 'important' member who's needs much override everyone elses.

Plus his catastrophic handling of corona whereby Sturgeon and the other home nations began to openly step away from UK advice because it was so unclear and didn't seem to follow the science but economic ideology. They've not done a bad job of giving out their own advice to a certain extent and has emboldened the independence voice by showing we can manage ourselves whereas having to listen to those in Westminster is actively detrimental.

So it may have gone over 50% UNDER Johnson, and his mismanagement and attitude has been a big factor in it, but it started gaining further momentum long before Johnson. Had they had another vote post-Brexit while May was in charge I reckon we'd have still seen a yes vote. The only change under Johnson has been it being a probable yes to an almost definite yes with the possibility of a landslide in favour.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Starmer is not going to win back the Red Wall, Scotland or Wales IMO.

Maybe not, but don't discount Johnson/Tories losing it thus giving it him back by default.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It has been on the rise since the referendum for a few reasons.

First things was after Cameron made all these promises and then as soon as they voted no the conversation turned almost instantly onto the effect on England.

Brexit also had an effect, voting Remain yet the UK as a whole voted to leave. Their voice once again overridden by England

Then there's Johnson who despite claiming to be a one-nation Tory has done more to assist the breakup of the union than anyone before him with his Irish border plans and just general impression of England being the 'important' member who's needs much override everyone elses.

Plus his catastrophic handling of corona whereby Sturgeon and the other home nations began to openly step away from UK advice because it was so unclear and didn't seem to follow the science but economic ideology. They've not done a bad job of giving out their own advice to a certain extent and has emboldened the independence voice by showing we can manage ourselves whereas having to listen to those in Westminster is actively detrimental.

So it may have gone over 50% UNDER Johnson, and his mismanagement and attitude has been a big factor in it, but it started gaining further momentum long before Johnson. Had they had another vote post-Brexit while May was in charge I reckon we'd have still seen a yes vote. The only change under Johnson has been it being a probable yes to an almost definite yes with the possibility of a landslide in favour.

If Labour were smart they’d hijack the Tories as being the actual one nation party.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Not sure this contradicts what I said. But again since the “cover up” they’ve been extremely helpful to the scientific community.

You can’t just keep harping back to the spilt milk.

I think that’s right

 

[shmmeee]

I think cause of death is a bit of a red herring. It’s clear from the excess deaths that tens of thousands have died prematurely. Unless you’ve got some hidden events that exactly match the spread of coronavirus killing people then the virus is to blame however indirectly.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

‘Slow to admit’ is a bit of an understatement shmmeee. The cover up was disgraceful and has led to a worldwide issue that may (nobody will know for sure) have been containable.

We have fucked up various things during the outbreak (as have a number of countries), but China’s behaviour is on a different level

This is a bit like complaining about conceding from a corner that shouldn’t have been given.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Don’t get this new furlough scheme at all. Why would an employer keep two or three people on under this scheme over sacking all but one and keeping them full time?

Cynic in me says that's the point - to minimise cost to the govt yet look like they're doing something to help. No business is going to pay people more than required for the work if they've got spare capacity. You don't pay overtime rates when you've got people underemployed. Esp at a time when business and revenues are likely to be much lower than normal.

So like you say get rid of 2 people, have one work full time and they get the same work for lower cost. Cold-hearted businesses could even use it as an excuse to start a bidding war on who would work for cheapest by saying "two of you three are going. Who want's to keep their job most?" Is slightly dependent on service and redundancy payouts but in the main this is how it would work practically.

It should be the company pays them for their worked hours (pro-rata is salaried) and the govt does a top up, the level of that being determined by income bracket - lower incomes get a higher top up as they're in more need to meet basic provisions. But even then it totally ignores those sectors which are unable to open, who need a totally different system.

Other option of course it just incompetence, but it took a quick glance for me to go "eh? how's that work?", 5 minutes to think about the failures within the system and another 5 to consider potential ways to improve it for both the businesses and different employees. I can't imagine the myriad of people with govt, parliament and Whitehall and the plethora of experts at their disposal couldn't do the same.

 

[David O'Day]

Maybe not, but don't discount Johnson/Tories losing it thus giving it him back by default.

Why not? The Red Wall and Welsh voters are economically left but socially conservative. Starmer seems to be lining up to be exactly what they want.

Pluse large parts of the Red Wall are paper thin majorities which were liable to turn back to labour seats in a non "brexit" election.

 

[shmmeee]

Why not? The Red Wall and Welsh voters are economically left but socially conservative. Starmer seems to be lining up to be exactly what they want.

Pluse large parts of the Red Wall are paper thin majorities which were liable to turn back to labour seats in a non "brexit" election.

There’s this delusion that’s white working class Brexit voters in Barnsley really wanted Corbyn if it wasn’t for the Brexit policy. They don’t. They’re the same classic British Hang the Pedos and Fund The NHS voters Johnson has been courting.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Why not? The Red Wall and Welsh voters are economically left but socially conservative. Starmer seems to be lining up to be exactly what they want.

Pluse large parts of the Red Wall are paper thin majorities which were liable to turn back to labour seats in a non "brexit" election.

Given that Dan Jarvis got 63% of the vote in 2017 before Starmer's disastrous intervention on Brexit which led to a 40% vote share in 2019, I don't believe the 'red wall' is interested in Starmer or his tory lite act

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

There’s this delusion that’s white working class Brexit voters in Barnsley really wanted Corbyn if it wasn’t for the Brexit policy. They don’t. They’re the same classic British Hang the Pedos and Fund The NHS voters Johnson has been courting.

Why’d they vote for him in 2017?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I think cause of death is a bit of a red herring. It’s clear from the excess deaths that tens of thousands have died prematurely. Unless you’ve got some hidden events that exactly match the spread of coronavirus killing people then the virus is to blame however indirectly.

Yeah, that's the consequence, and it hiked at that point, declined when we took measures to avoid the virus.

 

[Grendel]

Why’d they vote for him in 2017?

He campaigned well and exceeded expectations while May didn’t. Since then he seemed to give up and campaigned terribly

 

[Deleted member 5849]

He campaigned well and exceeded expectations while May didn’t. Since then he seemed to give up and campaigned terribly

Can't argue with that, there just wasn't the energy in the last election, it's like he didn't really care anymore.

 

[chiefdave]

I think cause of death is a bit of a red herring. It’s clear from the excess deaths that tens of thousands have died prematurely. Unless you’ve got some hidden events that exactly match the spread of coronavirus killing people then the virus is to blame however indirectly.

Spot on, people are busy arguing about the figures put out by the government but really you need to look at the ONS figures. There you can clearly see excess deaths, and in numbers that are substantially higher than the governments covid death figures. If the excess deaths aren't covid what is causing them?

 

[David O'Day]

Given that Dan Jarvis got 63% of the vote in 2017 before Starmer's disastrous intervention on Brexit which led to a 40% vote share in 2019, I don't believe the 'red wall' is interested in Starmer or his tory lite act

So it was all Starmers fault? Corbyn by 2019 was toxic same thing happened here and the tories nearly won two seats. Voters who are life long Labour voters voting tory because Corbyn was leader.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

So it was all Starmers fault? Corbyn by 2019 was toxic same thing happened here and the tories nearly won two seats. Voters who are life long Labour voters voting tory because Corbyn was leader.

Corbyn was unimpressive but Brexit was the big thing on why it was such a big change. Which Corbyn of course was a major part of.

If it was solely about Corbyn they wouldn't have voted for him first time round either, but they did.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Spot on, people are busy arguing about the figures put out by the government but really you need to look at the ONS figures. There you can clearly see excess deaths, and in numbers that are substantially higher than the governments covid death figures. If the excess deaths aren't covid what is causing them?

The anti lockdown idiots think they're all undiagnosed cancer patients / suicides

 

[chiefdave]

Cynic in me says that's the point - to minimise cost to the govt yet look like they're doing something to help. No business is going to pay people more than required for the work if they've got spare capacity. You don't pay overtime rates when you've got people underemployed. Esp at a time when business and revenues are likely to be much lower than normal.

Completely agree. The talk before the announcement was of a scheme modelled on the likes of Germany and France. This scheme seems fundamentally different in that it is in part down to employers to pay for the unworked hours. I've still not seen anybody explain why employers would take up this scheme over paying for the hours actually worked.

Although to be fair maybe I'm missing something as my knowledge of those schemes is limited to what a quick google turned up but I can't find any reference to those schemes requiring employers to pay for unworked hours. Also a huge difference in the contribution the state makes. Here we're looking at 22% from the state, looks to me that Germany is 60-67% and France is 70%.

Was also quite surprised to find we seem to be very much the odd one out with these schemes being in place throughout Europe. Much harder to go from a standing start to getting something suitable up and running. Although this is a similar story that has been highlighted by covid across so many areas such as lack of investment in healthcare and education.

 

[Grendel]

Completely agree. The talk before the announcement was of a scheme modelled on the likes of Germany and France. This scheme seems fundamentally different in that it is in part down to employers to pay for the unworked hours. I've still not seen anybody explain why employers would take up this scheme over paying for the hours actually worked.

Although to be fair maybe I'm missing something as my knowledge of those schemes is limited to what a quick google turned up but I can't find any reference to those schemes requiring employers to pay for unworked hours. Also a huge difference in the contribution the state makes. Here we're looking at 22% from the state, looks to me that Germany is 60-67% and France is 70%.

Was also quite surprised to find we seem to be very much the odd one out with these schemes being in place throughout Europe. Much harder to go from a standing start to getting something suitable up and running. Although this is a similar story that has been highlighted by covid across so many areas such as lack of investment in healthcare and education.

Our scheme was far more generous in the first instance -France isn’t extended for a year its french lay off laws that apply and the German scheme again is an extension of their lay off Programme which has been in place for 10 years - if you were in the French scene you’d be unemployed as you wouldn’t qualify

 

[shmmeee]

Why’d they vote for him in 2017?

Mostly they didn’t. Remainers did because we were the de facto remain party at that point. Once we’d lost the Brexit votes artificially inflating our figure by Lib Dem’s and soft Tories staying home the extent of our traditional Voter losses were clear. To be clear Corbyn and Brexit just put rocket boosters under a trend that had been going since the turn of the century.

We started losing the red wall in about 2003 because of immigration and have never done anything to reverse that slide. Brexit made it worse. Corbyns wokeness and lack of patriotism made it worse once the soft votes of liberals weren’t propping him up.

 

[chiefdave]

Our scheme was far more generous in the first instance -France isn’t extended for a year its french lay off laws that apply and the German scheme again is an extension of their lay off Programme which has been in place for 10 years - if you were in the French scene you’d be unemployed as you wouldn’t qualify

The fact that our scheme was more generous to start off with is irrelevant moving forward. Just highlights yet another failure of the government to properly manage the situation.

I already pointed out the French and German schemes existed pre-covid. The fact our system wasn't up to scratch prior to the pandemic doesn't give the government a free pass.

Why would I be unemployed under the French scheme?

 

[Grendel]

The fact that our scheme was more generous to start off with is irrelevant moving forward. Just highlights yet another failure of the government to properly manage the situation.

I already pointed out the French and German schemes existed pre-covid. The fact our system wasn't up to scratch prior to the pandemic doesn't give the government a free pass.

Why would I be unemployed under the French scheme?

The French scheme is a lay off scheme and now is 12 weeks on and 12 weeks off you are not allowed to claim more or the employer has to pay back

the German scheme is a scheme aimed at manufacturers really and encourages people to actually work for periods of time.

Our scheme was far too Generous at the outset - the German scheme existed in 2008 so blame Blair and Brown if you like

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Completely agree. The talk before the announcement was of a scheme modelled on the likes of Germany and France. This scheme seems fundamentally different in that it is in part down to employers to pay for the unworked hours. I've still not seen anybody explain why employers would take up this scheme over paying for the hours actually worked.

Although to be fair maybe I'm missing something as my knowledge of those schemes is limited to what a quick google turned up but I can't find any reference to those schemes requiring employers to pay for unworked hours. Also a huge difference in the contribution the state makes. Here we're looking at 22% from the state, looks to me that Germany is 60-67% and France is 70%.

Was also quite surprised to find we seem to be very much the odd one out with these schemes being in place throughout Europe. Much harder to go from a standing start to getting something suitable up and running. Although this is a similar story that has been highlighted by covid across so many areas such as lack of investment in healthcare and education.

So there's things happening elsewhere we could use as a starting point but instead decide to go down our own different route for no obvious benefit or reason. Why does that sound alarmingly familiar?

I swear some of it is certain people just refusing to do the same as places like France and Germany because of Brexit and now we're a 'sovereign nation in control of it's own laws' we've got to do it differently. After all we led the world during the Empire so anything we do will automatically be better because we're Britain.

 

[Grendel]

So there's things happening elsewhere we could use as a starting point but instead decide to go down our own different route for no obvious benefit or reason. Why does that sound alarmingly familiar?

I swear some of it is certain people just refusing to do the same as places like France and Germany because of Brexit and now we're a 'sovereign nation in control of it's own laws' we've got to do it differently. After all we led the world during the Empire so anything we do will automatically be better because we're Britain.

He doesnt understand the schemes

The German scheme doesn’t apply to many of the service sectors. Also it’s far more complex than he understands- it’s a lay off scheme and requires a working element so it’s an on off scheme - the change actually in this crises is to extend the support parameters so it covers payments for less hours covered - from 30% down to 10% - it’s not aimed at paying people not working at all during the period

Essentially it’s the same in France but that scheme requires a commitment to keep jobs after the claim period

Also many large employers don’t claim the full amount technically owed even from the initial calculation and pay a contribution - that’s why we’ve paid far more than Germany so far to workers in our scheme

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

He campaigned well and exceeded expectations while May didn’t. Since then he seemed to give up and campaigned terribly

Part of me thinks he wanted out in 2019 and agreed to annihilation to achieve it

 

[CCFCSteve]

This is a bit like complaining about conceding from a corner that shouldn’t have been given.

Not really at all. I’m not saying it’s anything to do with justifying elements of our response (which I’ve already indicated has been lacking in areas), I’m saying let’s not just accept/condone China’s behaviour.

My original comment was due to language Shmmeee used to play down their conduct. I didn’t agree with it. ‘Slow to admit’ is not really the same as covering up, intentionally lying and allowing it to spread to other countries before acknowledging it/admitting it (sharing what you know about it before it’s too late). Not to mention then trying to blame other countries for it or what they did to their own citizens who tried to disclose it.

Feel free to read up on the timeline of events and then tell me ‘slow to admit it’ or ‘harping back to split milk’ are fair/suitable language to describe what happened with China...when 1m people worldwide have died from something they potentially could have done a lot more to stop sooner

Ps I appreciate that shmmeee probably didn’t mean it to sound blasé when considering the wider context of the comment