Relaxation of restrictions

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

What if you don't have kids, what if you kids are grown up - what if you want society and the economy to get back to normal.

what if you want to live your life.

You say people need to be realistic because of the age profile of those affected, but if it was affecting younger age group - you wouldn't be saying we need to be realistic - your staying it would have to be different.

This virus could kill children who are high risk - but is it because these high risk children are not high in numbers, then we don't care about them?

Save us the faux outrage.

Of course the ideal scenario is this goes away in a few weeks and we all live happily ever after.

But we can't support a lockdown indefinitely, and people won't accept it much longer.

We have to play the hand we are dealt, it mainly kills old people.

No point in worrying now about an imaginary virus that mainly affects young people.

Thelonious Monk

easypazz wrote: »

people won't accept it much longer.

Am I naive to think the vast majority of people will accept whatever the Government tells us we need to do until told otherwise?

Tenzor07

stephenjmcd wrote: »

They'll be shut down again. The powers lapse at midnight Sunday that mistakenly says they can open. All being advised not to open. Lockdown will be extended tomorrow so no they won't be open unless they are brought back under essential services after Sunday night.

We shall see I guess, I mean I think it's ridiculous that Hardware and electronic stores can't open, they're usually big enough to allow as much physical distancing as Supermarkets.
Also they are essential businesses, if home workers have laptops and say a power supply for the laptop dies then how are they supposed to work?
Bicycle shops also, if someone who's listed as essential worker has to cycle to work due to the work location not being served by a bus, and needs a new chain fitted then they are in trouble..

Yet we can still go to an Off-licence and buy a slab of cheap booze and go get drunk...

Ace2007

easypazz wrote: »

Save us the faux outrage.

Of course the ideal scenario is this goes away in a few weeks and we all live happily ever after.

But we can't support a lockdown indefinitely, and people won't accept it much longer.

We have to play the hand we are dealt, it mainly kills old people.

No point in worrying now about an imaginary virus that mainly affects young people.

I'll approach this a different way for you - those in nursing homes are not going to hospital if they get the virus, therefore whose ending up in hospital?? - 62% of all confirmed cases are people under 54.

If we open up society too soon, hospitals will get overrun, and so while the age profile of deaths might be high now, overrun hospitals will lead to more deaths, and inevitable younger people will pass away.

But of course that will be ok, because people will be back at work and what's a few deaths eh?

easypazz

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Am I naive to think the vast majority of people will accept whatever the Government tells us we need to do until told otherwise?

Extremely.

The current, caretaker, government have no mandate for this, people are accepting of it and going along with it, for now.

But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election with different parties setting out different strategies to deal with this.

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

I'll approach this a different way for you - those in nursing homes are not going to hospital if they get the virus, therefore whose ending up in hospital?? - 62% of all confirmed cases are people under 54.

If we open up society too soon, hospitals will get overrun, and so while the age profile of deaths might be high now, overrun hospitals will lead to more deaths, and inevitable younger people will pass away.

But of course that will be ok, because people will be back at work and what's a few deaths eh?

Nobody is saying it is ok.

But we can't do this forever and it will lead to more problems than solutions.

Hoboo

easypazz wrote: »

But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election .

How would that work

easypazz

Hoboo wrote: »

How would that work

People vote:rolleyes:

Plumbthedepths

Ace2007 wrote: »

I'll approach this a different way for you - those in nursing homes are not going to hospital if they get the virus, therefore whose ending up in hospital?? - 62% of all confirmed cases are people under 54.

If we open up society too soon, hospitals will get overrun, and so while the age profile of deaths might be high now, overrun hospitals will lead to more deaths, and inevitable younger people will pass away.

But of course that will be ok, because people will be back at work and what's a few deaths eh?

The 62% under 54 going to hospital how many have died.
The biggest problem here if you ignore the lack of testing is despite being aware of the most at risk demographic from the Italian experience our CMO railled at the nursing homes restricting visitors. The homes should have closed no visitors and no contract staff moving between homes.
Now you do know where the majority clusters and deaths have occurred I take it?

Ace2007

easypazz wrote: »

Extremely.

The current, caretaker, government have no mandate for this, people are accepting of it and going along with it, for now.

But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election with different parties setting out different strategies to deal with this.

Second election won't solve anything - be at the exact same situation as we are now.

Idbatterim

I think as they slowly unwind the situation, maybe allow groups of four or five to meet again, could at least then have a few beers and bbq etc in gardens etc. If there is light at end of tunnel and small incremental steps, thats the best approach...

Idbatterim

Ace2007 wrote: »

Second election won't solve anything - be at the exact same situation as we are now.

yeah, might well have SF with the most seats if given another shot though!

road_high

easypazz wrote: »

Extremely.

The current, caretaker, government have no mandate for this, people are accepting of it and going along with it, for now.

But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election with different parties setting out different strategies to deal with this.

Yes the Shinnerz making videos is exactly the medicine and approach we need. Louise Reilly Health minister can do daily videos telling the HSE “dis is wha yas shuda done...”

d15ude

Ace2007 wrote: »

It doesn't have to be risky, if your told not to do something - then why do it?

Because we are a free democratic society, and don't just need to do as we are told!

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

Second election won't solve anything - be at the exact same situation as we are now.

And you know this because?

Ace2007

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

The 62% under 54 going to hospital how many have died.
The biggest problem here if you ignore the lack of testing is despite being aware of the most at risk demographic from the Italian experience our CMO railled at the nursing homes restricting visitors. The homes should have closed no visitors and no contract staff moving between homes.
Now you do know where the majority clusters and deaths have occurred I take it?

I believe 195 people have died in the hospitals, so that leaves what 40 that but have died in nursing homes or other settings

road_high

Idbatterim wrote: »

yeah, might well have SF with the most seats if given another shot though!

Very unlikely I’d say. Dismal performance since the election and people have gotten the frighteners re the economy. Shinnerz are the last thing we need right now, no need to saw limbs off to cure a virus

Tell me how

d15ude wrote: »

Because we are a free democratic society, and don't just need to do as we are told!

Why do you think we have a police force and legislature?

A key element of society is the concept of 'the common good'.

There is a greater importance than just a few people who believe what they want to do is the most important thing in the world.

road_high

easypazz wrote: »

And you know this because?

Last opinion poll was fairly telling yes

Diarmuid

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Am I naive to think the vast majority of people will accept whatever the Government tells us we need to do until told otherwise?

Up until they can't afford to pay the bills. Tunes will change then

Plumbthedepths

Ace2007 wrote: »

I believe 195 people have died in the hospitals, so that leaves what 40 that but have died in nursing homes or other settings

What's the median age of all deaths?

jmayo

ITman88 wrote: »

Another poster alluded to it, the scariest thing about Covid is people’s lack of ability to think for themselves.

On the other hand if you convince people something is bad enough, they will beg for protection at all costs.

That’s what’s happening, people are so utterly petrified from the media whipping up a storm that they genuinely believe it is worth crippling the economy long term to prevent pain in the short term.

They can’t see the wood from the trees with Covid.

The wood form the trees will be quiet clear when social welfare benefit is cut and the health care budget is halved.

ITman88 wrote: »

Ah FFS.

Not a plan in the world.

At some point, someone somewhere in Ireland needs to suggest an economic assessment.

Media loving doctors will not preform that economic assessment.

Oh FFS just give it a fooking rest.

I come back to this thread every few hours and you're non stop waffling fooking shyte the whole time.

And you are getting worse, you have gone now to claiming it's a grand conspiracy.

Get off the net, read a book, go for a short walk (you can go 1.2 km and back, look out the window.

Do something and stop spouting shtye.

BTW remember how you used the example of my wife's cousin (ex ICU nurse who volunteered at hospital near her new home) earlier as pointer to how everything was ok with ICU, well she is starting Monday.

Ah but sure you fooking know best, the ICUs are fine for space and for staff.
Sure isn't it all a conspiracy to keep you from single handedly saving the economy. :rolleyes:

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Even if we opened everything up tomorrow, the economy is still a basket case with no one wanting to go out, and the rest of the world being in shutdown.
This isn't solely down to the Irish Government's approach to the situation, it's a global economy and a global problem, so whatever we do here won't make much of a difference anyway, our GDP will be way down and unemployment skyrocketing.

Forget trying to reason with some around here.
Some seem to think we can have a functioning economy despite this pandemic.

Or else they couldn't give two sh**s and just don't want the inconvenience and the economy is just a pretense.

Thelonious Monk

Diarmuid wrote: »

Up until they can't afford to pay the bills. Tunes will change then

I doubt it, although this situation is unprecedented, we don't have a history of unrest in this country, and given this could be a global worldwide depression, you can't really blame the government if we're all broke soon enough

Ace2007

easypazz wrote: »

And you know this because?

Because SF are not going to run twice as many candidates as they did previously - if you look for instance Mary Lou - i don't think they had a running partner is her constituency - despite her getting away above what was needed.

You then have the people who voted for them, the ones that swayed away from FG for all reasons, and then might be swayed back because of how they have handled it.

Neither FG nor FF will go into power with SF, and i don't think SF want to be in power when this is all over.

All in all, we'll be back to square one.

Carfacemandog

TheCitizen wrote: »

Should re open headshops as well. Time to Grow your own

Looks like the Canadians have kept the weed shops open so.......

Mind you it's legal over there to begin with!

easypazz

road_high wrote: »

Last opinion poll was fairly telling yes

Ok, so country is run by opinion polls now.

I must have missed the memo.

:rolleyes:

Thelonious Monk

jmayo wrote: »

Forget trying to reason with some around here.
Some seem to think we can have a functioning economy despite this pandemic.

Or else they couldn't give two sh**s and just don't want the inconvenience and the economy is just a pretense.

FloatingVoter

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Looks like the Canadians have kept the weed shops open so.......

Mind you it's legal over there to begin with!

My 80 year old aunt (living in Toronto) has taken up smoking. Due to being pissed off by the depressing current news (and Donald Trump is an underlying issue). Fair ****s.

Diarmuid

jmayo wrote: »

Forget trying to reason with some around here.
Some seem to think we can have a functioning economy despite this pandemic.

Or else they couldn't give two sh**s and just don't want the inconvenience and the economy is just a pretense.

You seem to be willfully missing the point. Tanking the economy will cost lives too. It's all a trade-off.

Carfacemandog

FloatingVoter wrote: »

My 80 year old aunt (living in Toronto) has taken up smoking. Due to being pissed off by the depressing current news (and Donald Trump is an underlying issue). Fair ****s.

Sure she'd probably fit in with her age group there then, an 80 year old today would've been in their 20s during the 1960s.