|
Post by collingecounty on Aug 2, 2020 19:37:01 GMT
Happening
|
|
|
Post by gazz on Aug 2, 2020 21:38:19 GMT
Sorry, archie, you're failing to factor in the very real issue that some parents are f***ing idiots, mate. The pubs in Wales have been open for 3 weeks for outdoor consumption only and will open tomorrow for socially distanced indoor consumption. There has been no evidence that anything untoward has occurred in the last 3 weeks. That's Wales, though, matey. Besides which, how are you going to see any real evidence when the government have been lying to us since day one? They want us to go out to pubs, otherwise why did they lock Stockport down again, yet still keep pubs open? There's a reason for it - money. So they're hardly going to publish anything that will put them in a position where they have no choice but to consider closing them again. The only evidence you'll ever genuinely see is the evidence they want you to see. For instance, who came to the conclusion that nothing untoward had occurred in the last three weeks?
|
|
|
Post by gazz on Aug 2, 2020 21:43:54 GMT
In pubs that want to make money quickly, it i'n't. There lies the problem, mate. There's no way this can be properly regulated without a police presence at EVERY pub, and that ain't going to happen. The government don't care, we've had months and months of evidence to back that up. They're now more interested in leaving the EU than they are about saving lives, hence the latest Br***t propaganda campaign on TV. Keep pubs open, or keep people safe - what's more important? I know where this government stand on that one, but what about everyone else? Ars put it so much better than I could earlier in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by collingecounty on Aug 3, 2020 9:04:07 GMT
Pubs, like shops, can be comparatively safe if well regulated. The danger is when you have too many people crammed together. Since going out for a drink again, I've only gone to places where I knew they were likely to have strict rules in place, excellent hygiene and social distancing, and would not be crowded.
|
|
|
Post by gazz on Aug 3, 2020 12:14:15 GMT
Who came to the conclusion that nothing untoward had happened in pubs in Wales during the three weeks since they reopened?
I genuinely want to know, simply because I think it's bullshit and do not believe that these pubs are any safer than my own parents' back garden.
I'll tell you what I think. If Boris Johnson could introduce a levy on my family visits, there wouldn't be a restriction on them in Stockport right now.
|
|
|
Post by archie on Aug 3, 2020 15:06:19 GMT
Who came to the conclusion that nothing untoward had happened in pubs in Wales during the three weeks since they reopened? The Welsh government take decisions based on advice from the Chief Medical Officer and Public Health Wales. They announce changes in the regulations in advance and always with the proviso that if the figures change from previous easing then future easing will be suspended. The First Minister announced the provisional re-opening of pubs indoors 3 weeks ago and confirmed the decision on Friday based on the infection figures in that period. This is the closest to the figures that you'd like to see that I can find (click the Summary tab if necessary): public.tableau.com/profile/public.health.wales.health.protection#!/vizhome/RapidCOVID-19virology-Public/Headlinesummary
|
|
|
Post by gazz on Aug 3, 2020 16:35:00 GMT
That's way too difficult for me to read on my phone without my readers, mate. YOf possible, can you point me to the part where it proves that nothing untoward happened in the past three weeks in pubs since they reopened.
Whatever those stats say, I'm going to be very doubtful regarding their validity, especially when Johnson has now introduced "Eat out to help out".
That alone is reason enough not to trust any of those stats, mate, whatever they claim.
|
|
|
Post by archie on Aug 3, 2020 17:13:40 GMT
What needs to be understood is that Johnson has no say in what happens in Wales as far as regulations relating to Covid are concerned. Our regulations are actually written in law and most of the easing has been 2 or 3 weeks behind England. Some things were more restrictive for longer (eg. local travel only) and some are less restrictive (eg. face coverings in shops) but everything has been advised by the medical men.
I sympathise with the situation in Greater Manchester. After all, it means I can't visit my terminally ill brother. However, Welsh people have by and large obeyed the rules/law and about 70% approve of the government's actions.
|
|
|
Post by gazz on Aug 3, 2020 20:37:39 GMT
What needs to be understood is that Johnson has no say in what happens in Wales as far as regulations relating to Covid are concerned. Our regulations are actually written in law and most of the easing has been 2 or 3 weeks behind England. Some things were more restrictive for longer (eg. local travel only) and some are less restrictive (eg. face coverings in shops) but everything has been advised by the medical men. I sympathise with the situation in Greater Manchester. After all, it means I can't visit my terminally ill brother. However, Welsh people have by and large obeyed the rules/law and about 70% approve of the government's actions. By the same token, what needs to be understood here is that the Welsh have no say in what happens to the rest of us, but I still wouldn't trust them to reveal the whole truth regarding numbers in Wales when pubs are desperate for business and the treasury will no doubt be desperate to tax them, mate. I'm sorry to hear that you can't see your terminally ill brother, matey. My kids lost their grandmother to this horrible virus, who succumbed to it in less than a week, their final goodbyes spoken over a video call. I was unable to be there for them at that time because of the first lockdown, which was absolutely f***ing heartbreaking, mate, so I do understand how awful it must be for you right now - I hope you can get to see him soon. Anyway, my point stands, I just don't trust the official numbers when the economy is on its knees and desperate for a boost, whoever publishes them, so let's agree to differ.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2020 7:35:26 GMT
It's sometimes worth considering what ha happened elsewhere when schools were opened without sufficient consideration of the risks involved www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/world/middleeast/coronavirus-israel-schools-reopen.htmlOn the same day, they report that many schools which opened in the US, even with social distancing, have since had to close. At a basic level, it's risk management. Do it well and the event passes off without incident, do it badly and the chances are that it won't. Unfortunately, the cost of the former is far more easily determined than the the cost of failure and that's where the political classes fall over. They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. That's why the results of the pandemic simulation they ran in 2016 were ignored. They worked out how much it would cost to stockpile the equipment needed, train staff, identify and refine management plans, etc, etc then decided the chances of a pandemic were so low that they could ignore it, despite evidence that the risks were actually increasing (SARS amongst others). Nobody should let the Government off the hook on this one. The evidence has been there all along, just like it was for the likelihood of a massive financial crisis which were also ignored.
|
|