Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The strategy of favouring the old and the vulnerable will prove disastrous long term.
Options
Comments
-
Deleted User wrote: »The country is obviously not going to lockdown for 2 or 3 years, anybody that thinks that is naive at best. We’d be destroyed socially and economically. 3 months max.
That doesn’t mean that some people can’t choose to lockdown themselves. Everything can be done online nowadays anyways. If you want to stay in for 2 or 3 years, go ahead.
To me, Life is for living, not surviving.
Again I would expect that most people putting forward the lockdown argument are the type of people who are not particularly social anyway.
Remember for people who already spend their days sitting on a computer or living through the internet, this social distancing makes no difference to them, so in that way they don't appreciate the fact that people won't be able to live like this for long.
And again I repeat, in human society and human nature, the need for personal relationships and friendship always always overcomes the fear of death.0 -
Now, I wonder how long your new society would tolerate us being "cocooned" while you support us? Pay our bills? I can't see that lasting very long.
You’re very quick to accuse others of selfishness. But you don’t recognise it in yourself. You’re worried about your bills being paid. What about everyone else’s?
The WHO have one remit - stop the virus, to the exclusion of all other goals. Our government cannot act like that, it must balance competing interests.0 -
Measures here seem to be successful enough..... 190 new cases announced Thurs, 130 Fri & 102 yesterday.
If we continue like that total lock down shouldn't be required and hospitals won't be swamped.
25% of cases are health care workers, 25% are close contact & 35% are from folk travelling.
Community transition is quite low.0 -
Measures here seem to be successful enough..... 190 new cases announced Thurs, 130 Fri & 102 yesterday.
If we continue like that total lock down shouldn't be required and hospitals won't be swamped.
25% of cases are health care workers, 25% are close contact & 35% are from folk travelling.
Community transition is quite low.
I believe the last two days are anomalous, not to be a doom merchant but such an assertion about hospitals seems premature. Everything points to a rapid boost of numbers, at least in the short-term - lengthy incubation and increased testing as primary drivers.0 -
Ah, but you already know from the other thread, that I am one of those who would remain isolated, due to medical conditions that put me in the high risk category. So would my 24 year old daughter.
Now, I wonder how long your new society would tolerate us being "cocooned" while you support us? Pay our bills? I can't see that lasting very long.
So, is that a yes or a no?
It would tolerate it longer than it'd tolerate the majority of people self isolating.
Nope. You've just invented that in your head
Please, all you've done on both threads, is go on about how the lives (and mental health) of the elderly and vulnerable are expendable, in order to save the economy.
Again, its not "mine", its what the WHO recommends.
Clearly you've told yourself it's true so much that you now believe it is. It's been pointed out that the elderly and vunerable will be worse off if the economy implodes and we end up in a very deep recession, or worse yet, a depression.
I've asked you the question on the other thread which you ignored: where will those that rely on charity turn to when the money given to charity dries up? How will we afford basic, and not so basic, medicines? How will you feel when all sorts of social services are cut (again) because the government needs to stop spending so much money? How will you feel when the government refuses to hire more doctors and nurses because they can't afford to, including mental health professionals? How will you feel when we have yet even more homelessness as people have lost livelyhoods and eventually houses or can't afford to pay rent?
In any downturn it's always the least well off and most vulnerable that get screwed the most. I'm thinking of those people, whereas you are just thinking of yourself. And yet I'm the selfish one.
Point to me where the Who recommends self isolation for people for "however long it takes", where its clear that the time frame it question is 6 months plus. The WHO doesn't recommend self isolation in the first place (unless you feel unwell) but social distancing.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public
It's the HSE telling us to self isolate.And will you continue to comply if this goes on for longer then 3 months?
I will try my best to, yes.0 -
Advertisement
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »I believe the last two days are anomalous, not to be a doom merchant but such an assertion about hospitals seems premature. Everything points to a rapid boost of numbers, at least in the short-term - lengthy incubation and increased testing as primary drivers.
From what I've heard from those that work in hospitals, they are expecting a big rise in cases over the next 2 weeks. Hopefully it doesn't come to pass. I believe the CMO has said likewise.0 -
You’re very quick to accuse others of selfishness. But you don’t recognise it in yourself. You’re worried about your bills being paid. What about everyone else’s?
The WHO have one remit - stop the virus, to the exclusion of all other goals. Our government cannot act like that, it must balance competing interests.
Ah you're very quick to pull oneteeny tiny part of what I posted, completely out of context of everything else.
Nice try.0 -
-
Who are these people you claim live on charity? I don't know anyone who exists on charity donations in this country.CtevenSrowder wrote: »I've asked you the question on the other thread which you ignored: where will those that rely on charity turn to when the money given to charity dries up?CtevenSrowder wrote: »How will we afford basic, and not so basic, medicines? How will you feel when all sorts of social services are cut (again) because the government needs to stop spending so much money? How will you feel when the government refuses to hire more doctors and nurses because they can't afford to, including mental health professionals? How will you feel when we have yet even more homelessness as people have lost livelyhoods and eventually houses or can't afford to pay rent?
I'm not the Taoiseach. I'm not the Minister for Health, or the Minister for Social Protection. That's for them to work out, not me. Right now, my job is to look after my health, look my family's health, and comply with what is being asked of me and my family in terms of social isolating / social distancing so we can slow the spread.CtevenSrowder wrote: »In any downturn it's always the least well off and most vulnerable that get screwed the most. I'm thinking of those people, whereas you are just thinking of yourself. And yet I'm the selfish one.
Oh so noble, give me a break. You've shown on this and other threads that you're motivation is paying your own mortgage, not about looking after anyone else. There is nothing altruistic about your posts. How do you think I'm going to pay my mortgage if I have to self isolate indefinitely? What makes you think I have plenty of savings stashed to tide us over? I can work from home for now but it'll only be a matter of time before my wage is cut - or cut off - too.CtevenSrowder wrote: »Point to me where the Who recommends self isolation for people for "however long it takes", where its clear that the time frame it question is 6 months plus. The WHO doesn't recommend self isolation in the first place (unless you feel unwell) but social distancing.
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public
It's the HSE telling us to self isolate.
I don't know why you keep trying repeatedly to attribute this phrase "however long it takes" on me. "No longer than three months" or "more than six months" are the timeframes YOU were ranting about in the other thread, that you claim would lead to the ruination of the economy, yet somehow you've turned it around in your head that i came up with these numbers.
I never put any kind of timeframe on how long self isolating should last. This is now the second time I've clarified this. What I did say is that I will follow the WHO guidelines, and YES you can extend that to include the HSE recommendations. Because they are the professionals in this situation. So you can stop trying to bully me on this point now.CtevenSrowder wrote: »I will try my best to, yes.
"I will try my best, to"? (comply to WHO, and also HSE guidelines).
Doing your best is not good enough.
"Doing you best" really means "I'll do what suits me and ignore everything else" and is what will most likely lead to more infections, more deaths, and eventually a full lock down in this country, like has happened in others.
Which is what you have said you don't want, but really, its in your own hands. And thats really my final word on it.
Unfollowing the thread, because reading about how expendable some lives are to others, for the sake of money, is stressing me out.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Measures here seem to be successful enough..... 190 new cases announced Thurs, 130 Fri & 102 yesterday.
If we continue like that total lock down shouldn't be required and hospitals won't be swamped.
25% of cases are health care workers, 25% are close contact & 35% are from folk travelling.
Community transition is quite low.
My fiancé's work colleague got tested over a week ago, still no results
Numbers reported today are meaningless0 -
Who are these people you claim live on charity? I don't know anyone who exists on charity donations in this country.
There are people who rely on housing charities for housing, some for clothes, some for food. There was a man on the radio from a charity in I think Coolock pleading for money and facemasks so his charity could continue to deliver cooked food to those who needed it.
The fact that you don't know that such people exist is very tellingI'm not the Taoiseach. I'm not the Minister for Health, or the Minister for Social Protection. That's for them to work out, not me. Right now, my job is to look after my health, look my family's health, and comply with what is being asked of me and my family in terms of social isolating / social distancing so we can slow the spread.
I'm not this, I'm not that. I don't want to think about anyone other then me and my family. The fact is some people will have to think about these things, and some of us already are. Decisions will have to be made. And it's not going to be pretty going by history. Which is why more people should be thinking long term. But they aren't. They want to pontificate and feel morally superior throwing out lazy insults such as "economic fetishists", "self-absorbed", "selfish" etc. at those of us who want to look beyond the end of our noses. They don't even ant a discussion to happen.Oh so noble, give me a break. You've shown on this and other threads that you're motivation is paying your own mortgage, not about looking after anyone else. There is nothing altruistic about your posts. How do you think I'm going to pay my mortgage if I have to self isolate indefinitely? What makes you think I have plenty of savings stashed to tide us over? I can work from home for now but it'll only be a matter of time before my wage is cut - or cut off - too.
I don't have a mortgage. In fact, considering house prices and rents will likely go down, I'm one of the few who could potentially benefit from a recession. I may be finally be able to afford a my own house.
How is anyone going to pay their mortgage and bills if they have to self isolate and can't work. This is the point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My god. It's better to have a majority working so the government can help those who can't because of covid pay their mortgage and bills, such as yourself, instead of the economy on essential lockdown and eventually bankruptcy. Noone will be able to be helped then You can't seem to grasp this.I don't know why you keep trying repeatedly to attribute this phrase "however long it takes" on me. "No longer than three months" or "more than six months" are the timeframes YOU were ranting about in the other thread, that you claim would lead to the ruination of the economy, yet somehow you've turned it around in your head that i came up with these numbers.
I never put any kind of timeframe on how long self isolating should last.
You were asked how long you'd be willing to self-isolate. You replied for "however long it takes". So, to clarify, how long would you be willing to self isolate for? If the WHO said 2 years would you say ok? 18 months, 1 year, how long?This is now the second time I've clarified this. What I did say is that I will follow the WHO guidelines, and YES you can extend that to include the HSE recommendations. Because they are the professionals in this situation. So you can stop trying to bully me on this point now.
I am not bullying. It's a discussion, and the question of how long you would self-isolate is very pertinent to the discussion . It is not personal. Don't take it as such. By the by, I'm happy to drop the "whose more selfish than who nonsense", provided you are."I will try my best, to"? (comply to WHO, and also HSE guidelines).
Doing your best is not good enough.
I can only answer honestly. What, you want me to lie?"Doing you best" really means "I'll do what suits me and ignore everything else" and is what will most likely lead to more infections, more deaths, and eventually a full lock down in this country, like has happened in others.
Which is what you have said you don't want, but really, its in your own hands. And thats really my final word on it.
Unfollowing the thread, because reading about how expendable some lives are to others, for the sake of money, is stressing me out.
I am self isolating at the moment. the question is for how long it is sustainable. Again, you've got to look at the broader picture and consequences. But you won't.0 -
It's very telling that people on here are calling other selfish.
I assume these people are financially secure and have someone that may be in the vulnerable category. They are 100% right that everyone needs to self isolate and take this very seriously.
But they also need to understand that there are people here that may have just lost their jobs, have children and a mortgage or even worse rent to pay. That although it is important to protect the vulnerable, it is also equally as important to provide for your family and give your children a good life, a life some of our older citizens got to enjoy.
It's a balancing act. But it's not sane to think we can do this for 6 months to a year. People seem to think if we have 50-60% unemployment that the EU will bail us out...they won't be able to. And if our economy completely tanks, our hospitals will too. And then we're all f**ked.
My point is lets get this right, now!!! We won't get a second chance and we can't do half measures.0 -
It's very telling that people on here are calling other selfish.
I assume these people are financially secure and have someone that may be in the vulnerable category. They are 100% right that everyone needs to self isolate and take this very seriously.
But they also need to understand that there are people here that may have just lost their jobs, have children and a mortgage or even worse rent to pay. That although it is important to protect the vulnerable, it is also equally as important to provide for your family and give your children a good life, a life some of our older citizens got to enjoy.
It's a balancing act. But it's not sane to think we can do this for 6 months to a year. People seem to think if we have 50-60% unemployment that the EU will bail us out...they won't be able to. And if our economy completely tanks, our hospitals will too. And then we're all f**ked.
My point is lets get this right, now!!! We won't get a second chance and we can't do half measures.
Everything here I am in complete agreement with. The future generations deserve a relatively ok standard of living and standard of healthcare.
The most selfless act of all is to consider the generations younger than us and what they will face into as adults.
No one is suggesting on this thread that we don’t follow procedures we are currently adhering to, what we are discussing is how long these procedures can remain in place before the side effects outweigh the advantages0 -
The problem is that no government can stand over and continue business as usual while people are dying and spreading a virus. I suspect a debt write off will be inevitable in the near future even if it means the collapse of the euro. It's not sustainable to ruin the lives of future generations by incompetent mismanagement to keep the status quo moving. We have already destroyed tomorrow for a better today. Adding more gasoline to a pile of money won't make much of a difference. We've a pension crisis looming anyway.
You’re right the government can’t stand by and watch the virus spread.
However they can’t continue indefinitely with the current approach of 100s of thousands unemployed.
This can not continue for months on end.
Leo mentioned cocooning a week ago, and I imagine that will be the future to fight this. Possibly what might happen will be whoever can work will be at work and the vulnerable will be in complete isolation for a few months.
This thing is here for years if you followed the AMA with the doctor on this, so if that’s the case we will possibly follow a different approach in the future.0 -
If you want to avoid persistent long-term unemployment, even after the coronavirus is done, then you're going to have to have a good hard look at the faults in our economic system and the economic profession (and associated politics) - and start looking at the alternatives, and the faults in many of the alternatives, too.
If the way we run things, requires massive ecological/environmental destruction, unsustainable growth leading to unsustainable temperature increases (and all that involves) - and now requires voluntarily allowing the deaths of millions, in the name of continued economic growth - then that system is broken, and needs major restructuring to fix it.
All anyone wants to get back to though, is business as usual. When that's not workable/sustainable.0 -
If you want to avoid persistent long-term unemployment, even after the coronavirus is done, then you're going to have to have a good hard look at the faults in our economic system and the economic profession (and associated politics) - and start looking at the alternatives, and the faults in many of the alternatives, too.
If the way we run things, requires massive ecological/environmental destruction, unsustainable growth leading to unsustainable temperature increases (and all that involves) - and now requires voluntarily allowing the deaths of millions, in the name of continued economic growth - then that system is broken, and needs major restructuring to fix it.
All anyone wants to get back to though, is business as usual. When that's not workable/sustainable.
What are the alternative economic system’s?0 -
We may all have to go into total lockdown for a few weeks to get the number getting infected down but it makes sense that if isolation has to be done over a very long period if time it should be the old and sick that need to do it so the rest of the population can get back to work and get the economy moving again.
It's the taxes of the young and healthy that are needed to provide for those who are retired or unable to work.0 -
However they can’t continue indefinitely with the current approach of 100s of thousands unemployed.
This can not continue for months on end.
Leo mentioned cocooning a week ago, and I imagine that will be the future to fight this. Possibly what might happen will be whoever can work will be at work and the vulnerable will be in complete isolation for a few months.
Yes in the current state, it can continue for months. If people are responsible, then it won't have to get to a stricter state of lock down.
After cocooning the elderly, can you state what you think will be expected to re-open?
Schools and Unis open /closed?
High street clothing stores open /closed?
Tourism and international tourism / commercial travel sites open / closed?
Because cocooning should only be the last line of defense.
If you open the window tomorrow morning you'll hear plenty of people travelling to work.
For essential services, more people might need to be employed and trained up to allow for infection resilience, and costs of these services might need to increase.
(food creation and delivery, energy, healthcare, water, waste, other logistics, some manufacturing)
But even so, even the essential payment in our country would cover keeping families fed, warm and clothed. As said on the radio yesterday, if it's 30 billion in national debt, then so be it.
If you're living alone and work doesn't justify leaving your accommodation then it is is a big adjustment, and it does cause mental changes (less so I'd argue than, say, recovery from a hip or back operation)0 -
What are the alternative economic system’s?
America, Canada and the Uk all seem to be flirting heavily with Universal Basic Income of sorts right now. Even the right leaning politicans, like the Rebulicans in America, seem to be moving towards the idea of paying everyone a monthly wage for at least this month, if not the next.
UBI would probably allow the isolation to extend for a good bit longer; if everyone was getting an income of some sorts, they'd be less worried about food, etc. It would give people who've just lost their jobs a safety net, without having to deal with the massive pressure the Social Welfare system will be under processing hundreds of thousands of new applications.0 -
Advertisement
-
America, Canada and the Uk all seem to be flirting heavily with Universal Basic Income of sorts right now. Even the right leaning politicans, like the Rebulicans in America, seem to be moving towards the idea of paying everyone a monthly wage for at least this month, if not the next.
UBI would probably allow the isolation to extend for a good bit longer; if everyone was getting an income of some sorts, they'd be less worried about food, etc. It would give people who've just lost their jobs a safety net, without having to deal with the massive pressure the Social Welfare system will be under processing hundreds of thousands of new applications.
It may work, or at least bide us some time. But ultimately, again, it can only work long term if their is money flowing into the government. If people have little to spend their money on other then their bills and their mortgage, have no job and little prospect of finding one, then this is unlikely to work.
It's a short term solution, but not long term one (in my opinion!)0 -
America, Canada and the Uk all seem to be flirting heavily with Universal Basic Income of sorts right now. Even the right leaning politicans, like the Rebulicans in America, seem to be moving towards the idea of paying everyone a monthly wage for at least this month, if not the next.
UBI would probably allow the isolation to extend for a good bit longer; if everyone was getting an income of some sorts, they'd be less worried about food, etc. It would give people who've just lost their jobs a safety net, without having to deal with the massive pressure the Social Welfare system will be under processing hundreds of thousands of new applications.
Would UBI be means tested?
Or is it a nationwide payment?0 -
-
Would UBI be means tested?
Or is it a nationwide payment?
Universal :pac:
No means testing. Literally every adult over a certain age gets a payment of, say, €250 a week.
(This is all a cliffnotes idea obviously, and I'm not saying it's a perfect idea.)
Without needing to means test, you cut down on a tonne of the administration work involved with these sorts of tests. You no longer are worrying about trying to work out gets what; unemployed, medical disability, etc. All the red tape is drastically reduced.
People don't have to worry bout working awful zero hour contracts (**** jobs have to be more appealing and take better care of their workers, or no one will do them), and there's a larger safety net for self-employed people, or people who want to go back into education, to take risks. Some will sponge, obviously, but chances are that a lot of those who would already are, and the government is spending hundreds of thousands a year to work out who is and isn't.
People would still have to work to get better things; the idea is you're making sure they can cover the absolute essentials, and letting people work out how to improve their lot themselves. And as people get a little more money into their pocket, they are more likely to go into shops, etc, and spend more, thus delivering a boost to the economy.0 -
Would UBI be means tested?
Or is it a nationwide payment?
Minister was on RTE radio yesterday, saying that the details will be released ASAP this week,
but that means testing was not possible they didn't have the staff numbers even if the form was massively simplified, the backlog would be impossibly long.
Link:
https://www.rte.ie/radio1/saturday/programmes/2020/0321/1124539-saturday-with-cormac-headhra-saturday-21-march-2020/?clipid=1033628040 -
Having a New Deal style Job Guarantee, which is geared at eliminating our carbon emissions - permanently solving the problem of unemployment, and working on solving our contribution to climate change, both at the same time.What are the alternative economic system’s?
The UBI can't solve the problem of climate change, it's inherently inflationary (people spending money, creating demand without contribution to supply/production), and it's going to cause businesses to slash wages by the same amount as the UBI pays (the UBI is really a business subsidy, not an income subsidy) - the UBI also replaces the welfare system, so if it is abandoned due to new austerity measures - then you can permanently say goodbye to unemployment/jobseekers payments, as well - the proposlas for paying for it, also involve a massive regressive transformation of our tax system (flat tax vs todays progressive tax).0 -
The vast majority of people on here seem to be following instructions.
I think there's some weird idea that anyone who wants to discuss the long term economics of the situation are advocating for generational genocide. As if there's zero room to discuss the world that will be on the other side of this crisis.
And that's massively unfair.
Maxpfizer hit the nail on the head imo. It's probably great if you're privileged enough that you can see the world shut down and not have to worry about not just the next three months but the next three years or thirty years.
I absolutely appreciate the fact lives take priority over economics.
But there's some who don't even seemingly want to acknowledge the fact there's hundreds pf thousands of people now who, as well as having a deadly virus hanging over their heads, don't know if they'll be able to afford to feed themselves or heat themselves in the short term.
Personally, I've been doing a lot of reading about UBI in recent days, and see a trend towards that in the UK, US and Canada, even if it's on different trial levels.Everything here I am in complete agreement with. The future generations deserve a relatively ok standard of living and standard of healthcare.
The most selfless act of all is to consider the generations younger than us and what they will face into as adults.
No one is suggesting on this thread that we don’t follow procedures we are currently adhering to, what we are discussing is how long these procedures can remain in place before the side effects outweigh the advantages
Agree with you both. And can we not be simultaneously worried about our older relatives and our livelihoods?
I am currently temporarily laid off without pay and my other half is looking at being permanently laid off next week. The savings we have were supposed to be for a house deposit. That is out the window now. We are allowed to be worried about our ability to do basic things like buy a modest house and maybe start a family. We are allowed to be upset that our quality of life might be disrupted substantially for years after all of this is over.
Both of us are also worried about our grandparents' and parents' health and are basically staying at home unless we really need anything to abide by social distancing. It shouldn't be a shock that this can't go on forever, however. We need to spread the burden on our healthcare system but we can't just forget about people whose ability to earn and do the normal things (which require money!) has been obliterated.
This is an unimaginably difficult time for all of us. We can be anxious about both health and what the future holds financially...0 -
My fiancé's work colleague got tested over a week ago, still no results
Numbers reported today are meaningless
The numbers aren't meaningless. Don't be stupid.
My girlfriends father & sister were tested over a week ago and they'd their results within 24 hrs.
I don't believe anyone is waiting over a week on a test result TBH.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
CtevenSrowder wrote: »You can but expect to be labelled selfish, self absorbed, an economic fetishism etc. etc. by posters who will then suddenly dissappear when asked any tough questions.
Seems to be a recurring pattern in this thread :rolleyes:0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement