Relaxation of restrictions

niallo27

Gael23 wrote: »

If they think older people will stay at home for 18 months they have another thing coming

Well if they don't want to then they have to face the consequences. We can't live peoples lives for them.

Sierra Oscar

JoeExotic81 wrote: »

T

If restrictions don't start getting eased in the next month or two, the damage will start to become irreversible in many aspects. Yes people will die due to this, but the idea that everyone stays in lockdown until a vaccine arrives is simply ridiculous and mental.

If the virus is allowed to spread unchecked it will devastate the economy regardless. Do you really think people will be visiting shopping centres, attending large events or spending time in the company of others if there are thousands of infections daily and hundreds of deaths over a sustained period of time? There would be extreme panic which would effectively lead to a shutdown anyway.

Assetbacked

Far too many elderly people out for a walk where I live. Considering the measures are mainly to protect the likes of them as they are the ones to be affected the most by contracting the virus, it is disingenuous to force stringent measures on the vast majority of the population who won't be affected for too much longer. Perhaps another two weeks is the most I would say people have it in them to keep this up before it will be too difficult to enforce without bringing in socially destructive police enforcement (which won't happen).

Plumbthedepths

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

A vaccine won't be rolled out for 18 months! Waiting for the vaccine is not a realistic solution. Why is this so hard for some people to comprehend?

Emotion vrs pragmatism.

thebaz

Gael23 wrote: »

If they think older people will stay at home for 18 months they have another thing coming

Why are you so keen to remove restrictions to the elderly ?

These restrictions are in place primarily to save ther lives -
These restrictions are destroying many peoples future , including my own and many close to me - it is being done to save the vulnerable , which are the elderly and immuno-suppressed.

Phoebas

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

A vaccine won't be rolled out for 18 months! Waiting for the vaccine is not a realistic solution. Why is this so hard for some people to comprehend?

I don't think anyone is suggesting continuing the lockdown until the vaccine arrives, but the only solution is the vaccine.

The only question is how we manage transmission while we wait for the vaccine.

thebaz

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't think anyone is suggesting continuing the lockdown until the vaccine arrives, but the only solution is the vaccine.

The only question is how we manage transmission while we wait for the vaccine.

adopt a South Korea / Sweden approach -

KiKi III

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Hardware/garden centres to name two, now your turn any suggestions?

I believe both of those are due to open on Tuesday. They were legally allowed to open over the weekend but the government asked them not to to prevent a bank holiday rush and a spike in infection.

I’d me more inclined to shut more things down than open them up. I don’t understand why newsagents and off licenses are open, couldn’t people get their booze and newspapers at the supermarket with the weekly shop?

JoeExotic81

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

If the virus is allowed to spread unchecked it will devastate the economy regardless. Do you really think people will be visiting shopping centres, attending large events or spending time in the company of others if there are thousands of infections daily and hundreds of deaths over a sustained period of time? There would be extreme panic which would effectively lead to a shutdown anyway.

Where did I say large events and shopping centers should go back to normal?

Obviously some restrictions stay. The current way cannot work much longer though. There has to be a sensible middle ground. A lot of people in this thread, they seem resigned to be locked up until a vaccine arrives. I can't comprehend how mental that is.

lainey_d_123

niallo27 wrote: »

What countries in europe are doing so much better than us, you really think a total shutdown in February would mean everything would be back open now, this is worldwide, it only takes a few people to start it all back up again.

I live in the UK, so I'm talking about that, but there are landlocked countries which are doing better than Ireland because of stricter measures earlier on. As you say yourself, this lockdown cannot last forever, and it will HAVE to be relaxed at some point. People would have found it far easier to stay in for a month in February when the weather was crap than now over the Easter holiday weekend. The virus is here to stay either way and I think locking down earlier would have meant far fewer cases in this first wave.

Assetbacked wrote: »

Far too many elderly people out for a walk where I live. Considering the measures are mainly to protect the likes of them as they are the ones to be affected the most by contracting the virus, it is disingenuous to force stringent measures on the vast majority of the population who won't be affected for too much longer. Perhaps another two weeks is the most I would say people have it in them to keep this up before it will be too difficult to enforce without bringing in socially destructive police enforcement (which won't happen).

It's very frustrating to see so many elderly people out and about, especially chatting and non-essential time outside. I understand it's hard, but the entire country has literally shut down to protect them, people have lost their jobs and basically had their lives ruined, and they can't stay in for a few weeks for something which is being done to protect people almost exclusively in their age group?

People love to criticise young people, but it definitely isn't young people around here who are being careless and reckless. The poor behaviour is almost exclusively from people who are 50+.

Blueshoe

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Ramp up testing people are still waiting up to 14 days for results which is ridiculous.Open business that can achieve good social distancing for a start. Have an economic expert as part of the advisory expert group to the government. Any suggestions yourself or is just sniping at others you are interested in?

So up the testing and open the potted plant shop.
There are already experts working with the government.
Nothing ground breaking there so perhaps stop having a go at everyone else's opinion if yours is nothing worth noting. It's easier for everyone that way

KiKi III

Assetbacked wrote: »

Far too many elderly people out for a walk where I live. Considering the measures are mainly to protect the likes of them as they are the ones to be affected the most by contracting the virus, it is disingenuous to force stringent measures on the vast majority of the population who won't be affected for too much longer. Perhaps another two weeks is the most I would say people have it in them to keep this up before it will be too difficult to enforce without bringing in socially destructive police enforcement (which won't happen).

One thing that’s been a little annoying in all this is the different attitudes to different generations flouting the rules.

When it was millennials it was because we are selfish snowflakes who can’t even sit on the couch for two weeks when asked.

But when it’s older people there’s this “well fair play to them” attitude if they’re insisting on being out and about.

Logan Roy

JoeExotic81 wrote: »

Trump is an absolute turnip but he is spot on with his new little catchphrase, "The cure cannot be worse than the problem itself".

If restrictions don't start getting eased in the next month or two, the damage will start to become irreversible in many aspects. Yes people will die due to this, but the idea that everyone stays in lockdown until a vaccine arrives is simply ridiculous and mental.

Did you post this in return for a pardon? :pac:

Ulysses Gaze

thebaz wrote: »

adopt a South Korea / Sweden approach -

Is that the Swedish approach that looks like backfiring on them?

https://time.com/5817412/sweden-coronavirus/

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/covid-19-sweden-s-less-stringent-measures-to-change-/1794325

According to the U.S-based John Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Centre, Sweden with a population of 10 million has recorded 6,830 COVID-19 cases with 401 deaths.

“We will have more seriously ill people who need intensive care,” Prime Minister Stefan Lovfen told the local paper the Dagens Nyheter at the weekend.

“We are facing thousands of deaths. We need to prepare for that,” he added.

He said, although the virus spread slower in Sweden than Spain and Italy, it does not mean there will be fewer deaths.

Sweden moving to stringent measures

With the latest developments, Sweden is now taking further measures to stem the spread of the virus.

Under the new legislation, the Swedish parliament will be consulted this week, before the government takes any new emergency steps, which will include shutting airports, train and bus stations and closing shops and restaurants.

Banning social gatherings of more than 50 people, initiating online classes at universities and high schools are among the new measures being introduced by the government.

On Sunday, Sweden’s King Carl XVI Gustaf addressed the public via television and asked them to stay at home during Easter break.

Plumbthedepths

KiKi III wrote: »

I believe both of those are due to open on Tuesday. They were legally allowed to open over the weekend but the government asked them not to to prevent a bank holiday rush and a spike in infection.

I’d me more inclined to shut more things down than open them up. I don’t understand why newsagents and off licenses are open, couldn’t people get their booze and newspapers at the supermarket with the weekly shop?

So your answer is a deeper lockdown, grand so.

JoeExotic81

Logan Roy wrote: »

Did you post this in return for a pardon? :pac:

did I say turnip? I misspelled Trojan!! Beautiful man! Make America exotic again!!

Gael23

thebaz wrote: »

Why are you so keen to remove restrictions to the elderly ?

These restrictions are in place primarily to save ther lives -
These restrictions are destroying many peoples future , including my own and many close to me - it is being done to save the vulnerable , which are the elderly and immuno-suppressed.

Because long term such a policy has significant social and psychological consequences. Also parents working from home for the foreseeable future need grandparents to help with childcare

KiKi III

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

So your answer is a deeper lockdown, grand so.

Yeah, I think essential should mean essential and I wouldn’t include off licenses in this.

Very easy to pick up your beers and a paper at the supermarket.

Juwwi

It's all about the hospitals ,, there will be no
lifting of restrictionss untill they have them under control .

How can we have a country up and running if the hospitals break down and people from road traffic incidents are left at the door of a hospital.

If restrictions were lifted today in 2 weeks hospitals would be at full capacity .

This talk of we can't go on like this not knowing a date , nobody knows when the hospitals will be able to cope so a date can't be given .

I understand not everyone has a rainy day fund and the €350 won't be enough for some ,but there has been a 3 month break on mortgages , 70% of pay ( I think it is ) if your job didn't let you go ,or €350 a week if let go and for self employed just to stay at home .

It's alot more financially than what other countries have done .

I don't think the government did a great job at the start of this virus pandemic but they cant do much more than they are doing now imo .

Pete_Cavan

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Ramp up testing people are still waiting up to 14 days for results which is ridiculous.

Right, which means also that the figures we see today for new cases is pointless to use a concrete measure of progress, yet decisions are being made with it.

The figures aren't pointless. Most statistics we see are based on a sample, particularly live data relating to the population where you can't acquire the necessary information from the entire population and analyse it fast enough, the info is out of date before it is published. Instead, they take a sample of the population and extrapolate. Its the same with the testing. If you know the sample size (i.e. The number of tests preformed every day) and see the rate of positive tests it tells you a lot. If the proportion of positive tests is remaining fairly constant, you know things aren't getting out of hand. A lot of people seem to think that you need to test almost everyone every day to get useful info which is not the case.

As I mentioned before, hospitalisations are key, it is a good thing if lots of people are getting infected but the hospitals are still operating within capacity.

Plumbthedepths

KiKi III wrote: »

Yeah, I think essential should mean essential and I wouldn’t include off licenses in this.

Very easy to pick up your beers and a paper at the supermarket.

Thanks I'd prefer just to ignore you now.

Phoebas

thebaz wrote: »

adopt a South Korea / Sweden approach -

Those are very different approaches - and the jury is very much out on Swedens.

KiKi III

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Thanks I'd prefer just to ignore you now.

By all means. I guess it’s easier than explaining why off licences need to be open?

0gac3yjefb5sv7

What time will there be an announcement on the restrictions today?

Blueshoe

KiKi III wrote: »

By all means. I guess it’s easier than explaining why off licences need to be open?

Welcome to my world

Pete_Cavan

Gael23 wrote: »

If they think older people will stay at home for 18 months they have another thing coming

We can't get older people to stay at home for 18 months but people here are telling us that the everyone including old and young need to stay at home until number of new cases drops to near zero, which will require a vaccine that is going to take 18 months to roll out.

So the old won't stay at home to protect themselves but everyone else has to stay at home despite there being little risk to them!

Micky 32

KiKi III wrote: »

By all means. I guess it’s easier than explaining why off licences need to be open?

It’s not wise to restrict alcohol. There’s a lot of alcohol dependent people out there and alcoholics. If the supply was suddenly cut alcohol withdrawal can be deadly and put a further strain on the health system.

KiKi III

Micky 32 wrote: »

It’s not wise to restrict alcohol. There’s a lot of alcohol dependent people out there and alcoholics. If the supply was suddenly cut alcohol withdrawal can be deadly and put a further strain on the health system.

I haven’t suggested restricting alcohol. I specifically said you can get your beers in your local supermarket. No need for independent off licenses to be open.

Ulysses Gaze

Micky 32 wrote: »

It’s not wise to restrict alcohol. There’s a lot of alcohol dependent people out there and alcoholics. If the supply was suddenly cut alcohol withdrawal can be deadly and put a further strain on the health system.

What KiKi is saying though is that they can get booze in a Supermarket.

Gael23

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

We can't get older people to stay at home for 18 months but people here are telling us that the everyone including old and young need to stay at home until number of new cases drops to near zero, which will require a vaccine that is going to take 18 months to roll out.

So the old won't stay at home to protect themselves but everyone else has to stay at home despite there being little risk to them!

What’s your point?