Covid 19 Part XXVII- 62,002 ROI (1,915 deaths) 39,609 NI (724 deaths) (02/11) Read OP

mloc123

bb1234567 wrote: »

It's to discourage people leaving the house and being out and about and you can't close places that provide food so this is where that leaves us

Yup... it is to stop people heading out to browse around the clothes section for "something to do"

is_that_so

bb1234567 wrote: »

It's to discourage people leaving the house and being out and about and you can't close places that provide food so this is where that leaves us

It would be a whole lot clearer to just shut shopping centres. It's less about people and more about minimising the number of retail hit by Level 5.

prunudo

bb1234567 wrote: »

It's to discourage people leaving the house and being out and about and you can't close places that provide food so this is where that leaves us

But people are leaving the house for so many various reasons its an over the top reaction. I'd understand if we were in a proper level 5 strict lockdown but we're not. The authorities may think we are in the strictest level but we're are not. Its level 4 at best.

khalessi

So the Department received a letter in August about the hand sanitiser

https://www.westmeathindependent.ie/2020/10/23/school-hand-sanitiser-concerns-raised-in-local-mans-letter-to-minister-in-august/

mloc123

prunudo wrote: »

That is all well and good, but given the amount of exemptions to type of work allowed and that schools are open I don't understand why they are being so draconian on it. Tesco and the likes have always sold mixed goods, not like they are trying to capitalise on the closure of other shops.

And as has been pointed out hundreds, maybe thousands of times now.... some types of work and education are viewed as being essential services, having a browse for new clothes in Tesco because you have nothing else to fill your time is not.

CIARAN_BOYLE

The HorsesMouth wrote: »

Agree with all this. The closure of clothes shops and non essential retail to me makes no sense. They did a study in US or UK, I can't remember, which said retail was the cause of a negligible amount of virus spread.
I walked into Dunnes the other day to see it all closed off and it was the first time I felt like I was going to lose the plot with anger. Not with Dunnes or anything but with the government etc for implementing ridiculous petty restrictions when there's no need. The 5km rule is another one.

Even if I agree with you that non essential retail is negligible there is a problem.

The golf is negligible. The hair dressers is negligible. Retail is negligible.

Guess what?

3 Negligible figures isn't negligible anymore.

Everyone can't get their negligible activity back.

The other problem of course is that non essential retail (like the bars and pubs) are likely to create cases from community transmission that are harder to trace. So its difficult to prove an effect even if its present.

prunudo

mloc123 wrote: »

Yup... it is to stop people heading out to browse around the clothes section for "something to do"

Not my thing and understand its how some people spend their free time, but surely browsing in Tesco or dunnes clothes section isnt the same as going into various individual clothes shop. What the former stock is surely on the essential end of clothing rather tham the fashion end.

TonyMaloney

mloc123 wrote: »

Yup... it is to stop people heading out to browse around the clothes section for "something to do"

No, as mentioned a page ago it's about competition.

It's seen as unfair for dunnes/tesco to continue selling clothes etc while their rivals are forced to shut.

is_that_so

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Even if I agree with you that non essential retail is negligible there is a problem.

The golf is negligible. The hair dressers is negligible. Retail is negligible.

Guess what?

3 Negligible figures isn't negligible anymore.

Everyone can't get their negligible activity back.

The other problem of course is that non essential retail (like the bars and pubs) are likely to create cases from community transmission that are harder to trace. So its difficult to prove an effect even if its present.

If the total level of negligible adds up to less than 1% it's still absolutely negligible and makes it look like anything that can be closed should be is the strategy. That's not living with this nor sustainable.

Liberalbrehon

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

prunudo

TonyMaloney wrote: »

No, as mentioned a page ago it's about competition.

It's seen as unfair for dunnes/tesco to continue selling clothes etc while their rivals are forced to shut.

So its not about protecting people from covid or allowing people have access to essential items, its because one company or business group were in the ear of a politician.

is_that_so

Liberalbrehon wrote: »

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Nor is a one line cliché evidence of coherent thought!

mloc123

prunudo wrote: »

Not my thing and understand its how some people spend their free time, but surely browsing in Tesco or dunnes clothes section isnt the same as going into various individual clothes shop. What the former stock is surely on the essential end of clothing rather tham the fashion end.

My friend works in Tesco, back in March/April he said that people doing their shopping wasn't an issue... but people coming in for "a look", sometimes the same people a couple of times a day were. Their clothes section was a separate unit and they ended up closing it at the time (without being told to).

I don't get the sudden urge for everyone to go buy some cheap clothes in Tesco tho... surely you can live for 6 weeks without buying new clothes..

The HorsesMouth

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Even if I agree with you that non essential retail is negligible there is a problem.

The golf is negligible. The hair dressers is negligible. Retail is negligible.

Guess what?

3 Negligible figures isn't negligible anymore.

Everyone can't get their negligible activity back.

The other problem of course is that non essential retail (like the bars and pubs) are likely to create cases from community transmission that are harder to trace. So its difficult to prove an effect even if its present.

But there is a blur between the essential and non essential retail shops. Look at what is going on in Dunnes. If you just left that section of the economy open there would be no blur and people would be able to shop and keep the economy going a bit more.

is_that_so

mloc123 wrote: »

My friend works in Tesco, back in March/April he said that people doing their shopping wasn't an issue... but people coming in for "a look", sometimes the same people a couple of times a day were. Their clothes section was a separate unit and they ended up closing it at the time (without being told to).

I don't get the sudden urge for everyone to go buy some cheap clothes in Tesco tho... surely you can live for 6 weeks without buying new clothes..

Because it's what they do. Why, oh why aren't other people like me?!

Jim_Hodge

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Ok. Weird I couldn't find the Twitter post

Maybe look beyond Twitter for news.

prunudo

mloc123 wrote: »

My friend works in Tesco, back in March/April he said that people doing their shopping wasn't an issue... but people coming in for "a look", sometimes the same people a couple of times a day were. Their clothes section was a separate unit and they ended up closing it at the time (without being told to).

I don't get the sudden urge for everyone to go buy some cheap clothes in Tesco tho... surely you can live for 6 weeks without buying new clothes..

I don't understand people who would want to browse any clothes shop let alone the section in Tesco. Its not so much the sudden urge but it would be nice that in the next 5 weeks should I need to get some new item of clothing, whether its socks, a wholly hat or whatever it may be that there is an option for me to do that.

rob316

Can't go to work today as my washing machine broke so I had no clean socks. I went to dunnes to buy some and they wouldn't sell them to me at it was against the law. I've had to buy a new washing machine instead.

mloc123

prunudo wrote: »

I don't understand people who would want to browse any clothes shop let alone the section in Tesco. Its not so much the sudden urge but it would be nice that in the next 5 weeks should I need to get some new item of clothing, whether its socks, a wholly hat or whatever it may be that there is an option for me to do that.

Well, you are in luck Based on my local Tesco... which has the clothes section closed off and a single line of essentials available (socks, underwear, baby grows etc..)

You also have hundreds, or thousands of online shops that will sell you anything you want.

Leftwaffe

I think in a few years time we will look back and think closing retail was a massive error. Just an assumption.

The amount of virus spread in limited capacity stores has got to be absolutely negligible in comparison to the pay off economically.

And don't tell me that miniscule spread in stores has to be stopped when I'm going into a school with 1000 odd people in it every day.

polesheep

It looks like Italians aren't happy with more restrictions. Things like this have a habit of spreading on the Continent. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54701042

Leftwaffe

mloc123 wrote: »

You also have hundreds, or thousands of online shops that will sell you anything you want.

Cool, going to tell my 97 year old grand mother and her mates to surf the Web for clothes.

polesheep

mloc123 wrote: »

Well, you are in luck Based on my local Tesco... which has the clothes section closed off and a single line of essentials available (socks, underwear, baby grows etc..)

You also have hundreds, or thousands of online shops that will sell you anything you want.

TBF it's difficult to buy clothes online. Most people have to try something on to confirm a good fit.

mloc123

Redordeadqwwer wrote: »

Cool, going to tell my 97 year old grand mother and her mates to surf the Web for clothes.

I reckon some of the clothes they have might do them for 6 weeks... surely they aren't still having growth spurts

mloc123

polesheep wrote: »

TBF it's difficult to buy clothes online. Most people have to try something on to confirm a good fit.

I think socks and underwear are relatively easy to get right... that is what everyone is now panicking about right? I guess the fear from all men is that their mam might not get to buy their annual supply for xmas

caveat emptor

polesheep wrote: »

It looks like Italians aren't happy with more restrictions. Things like this have a habit of spreading on the Continent. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54701042

Italy has a big problem with ultras who now have no football to go to.
Remember Sean Cox. While most Italians are pissed off the nasty element always takes advantage.

https://twitter.com/Irenls_/status/1320979489174769664?s=20

polesheep

mloc123 wrote: »

I think socks and underwear are relatively easy to get right... that is what everyone is now panicking about right? I guess the fear from all men is that their mam might not get to buy their annual supply for xmas

I don't see panic myself. What I do see is a difficulty in buying clothes. Even when restrictions were lighter it was next to impossible to try clothes on in shops and sizes actually vary a lot. Apart from a pair of shoes bought online, I haven't been able to buy clothes since last January.

polesheep

caveat emptor wrote: »

Italy has a big problem with ultras who now have no football to go to.
Remember Sean Cox. While most Italians are pissed off the nasty element always takes advantage.

https://twitter.com/Irenls_/status/1320979489174769664?s=20

I don't know why you had to bring poor Sean Cox into it. Ultras or not, it could represent a rising problem.

BringBackMick

Do people actually think they are going to catch COVID walking past people on a path.

It is actually infuriating

caveat emptor

polesheep wrote: »

I don't know why you had to bring poor Sean Cox into it. Ultras or not, it could represent a rising problem.

Really? Italy has a serious problem with football violence. It's all over the news there that they are exploiting the situation to cause havoc. How is that relevant? Again the majority of people are adhering to restrictions. These thugs are out in force in these protests and most cities have large groups.

Peaceful protest is fine. Violence should always be condemned. Don't you agree?
The nasty element always get headlines. Same as here with the anti mask alt-right-sh!te element here.

polesheep

caveat emptor wrote: »

Really? Italy has a serious problem with football violence. It's all over the news there that they are exploiting the situation to cause havoc. How is that relevant? Again the majority of people are adhering to restrictions. These thugs are out in force in these protests and most cities have large groups.

Peaceful protest is fine. Violence should always be condemned. Don't you agree?
The nasty element always get headlines. Same as here with the anti mask alt-right-sh!te element here.

I don't know where you are going with this. Honestly. I stated that it could be a rising problem. I didn't condone it.

GeorgeBailey

A lot of the point of closing retail is to give people fewer reasons to leave the house in the first place.

forumdedum

BringBackMick wrote: »

Do people actually think they are going to catch COVID walking past people on a path.

It is actually infuriating

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

zinfandel

Redordeadqwwer wrote: »

Cool, going to tell my 97 year old grand mother and her mates to surf the Web for clothes.

and is she going to get on the bus down to Dunnes? would hope your family would be looking after her shopping....

is_that_so

forumdedum wrote: »

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

Does he also hear voices late at night?

polesheep

forumdedum wrote: »

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

How is his work on the vaccine coming along?

TomSweeney

BringBackMick wrote: »

Do people actually think they are going to catch COVID walking past people on a path.

It is actually infuriating

Yes people seem to think it's in the air.

bush

BringBackMick wrote: »

Do people actually think they are going to catch COVID walking past people on a path.

It is actually infuriating

I was walking on the beach the other day and as someone came towards me he took out his mask and put it on

Liberalbrehon

is_that_so wrote: »

Nor is a one line cliché evidence of coherent thought!

- one line lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

It is no cliché and relevant to the testing regime for covid-19. Sorry, I didn't write a rambling essay, but brevity is the essence of understanding.

The problem with the current testing regime is it's limited capacity. It should be widely expanded with detailed tracing. It would have been far cheaper to follow that principle than reduce the capacity in both after first lock down. It should have been expanded, but NPET/Govt will probably repeat their mistake again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

I would also change the current county system of managing travel restrictions and other activities into working zones that make sense for travel and work.

mloc123

polesheep wrote: »

I don't see panic myself. What I do see is a difficulty in buying clothes. Even when restrictions were lighter it was next to impossible to try clothes on in shops and sizes actually vary a lot. Apart from a pair of shoes bought online, I haven't been able to buy clothes since last January.

Fair enough, not being able to try them on is a pain.

I just don't get this uproar about Tesco/Dunnes... saw on my local Facebook page also, you'd swear kids were wearing coal sacks the way people were complaining.

BringBackMick

forumdedum wrote: »

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

This type of BS is obviously driving it.

zinfandel

polesheep wrote: »

I don't see panic myself. What I do see is a difficulty in buying clothes. Even when restrictions were lighter it was next to impossible to try clothes on in shops and sizes actually vary a lot. Apart from a pair of shoes bought online, I haven't been able to buy clothes since last January.

maybe dig a bit deeper into your wardrobe, I would say most being could manage especially when going nowhere, do you really need new PJ's and shoes for christmas day!

Funsterdelux

khalessi wrote: »

So the Department received a letter in August about the hand sanitiser

https://www.westmeathindependent.ie/2020/10/23/school-hand-sanitiser-concerns-raised-in-local-mans-letter-to-minister-in-august/

At this stage it wouldnt surprise me if someone from the future went back to March to warn them about a dodgy sanitiser, and still they wouldnt listen.

is_that_so

Liberalbrehon wrote: »

- one line lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

It is no cliché and relevant to the testing regime for covid-19. Sorry, I didn't write a rambling essay, but brevity is the essence of understanding.

The problem with the current testing regime is it's limited capacity. It should be widely expanded with detailed tracing. It would have been far cheaper to follow that principle than reduce the capacity in both after first lock down. It should have been expanded, but NPET/Govt will probably repeat their mistake again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

Nah, it's a throwaway line without no context and not much thought. Much better effort here!

prunudo

forumdedum wrote: »

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

I heard his out burst a few months back on Pat Kenny's show. He was just jumping to wild conclusions and looking for somebody to blame. Unless he tracked down those 2 joggers and found out they were positive at that time it was just an uninformed fearmongering rant.

mloc123

forumdedum wrote: »

Bill Hughes from Newstalk is certain he caught it from a group of joggers that passed too close to him.

I'd say Bill is one of those people that hates anyone who exercises tho.... probably tell you that running is bad for you too - "will destroy yours knees..." he says, sitting eating a fry.

polesheep

zinfandel wrote: »

maybe dig a bit deeper into your wardrobe, I would say most being could manage especially when going nowhere, do you really need new PJ's and shoes for christmas day!

And do you really need to be so condescending? I'm not a person that maintains a 'wardrobe'. I tend to wear the same small amount of clothes until they need replacement. I'm not desperate for clothes, but some of the condescending posts in reply to posters who say that they need to buy clothes are galling.

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

Really? Italy has a serious problem with football violence. It's all over the news there that they are exploiting the situation to cause havoc. How is that relevant? Again the majority of people are adhering to restrictions. These thugs are out in force in these protests and most cities have large groups.

Peaceful protest is fine. Violence should always be condemned. Don't you agree?
The nasty element always get headlines. Same as here with the anti mask alt-right-sh!te element here.

polesheep wrote: »

I don't know where you are going with this. Honestly. I stated that it could be a rising problem. I didn't condone it.

That's great, I didn't suggest you did. You stated that "it has a habit of spreading on the continent". That I don't agree. Italy has a particular issue with a violent football ultra scene who are exploiting the situation. While some countries have similar issues, particularly Eastern Europe, most don't.

When Naples didn't collect it's rubbish for years it didn't spread to the rest of the continent. Italy is beautiful country but not without its issues.

polesheep wrote: »

It looks like Italians aren't happy with more restrictions. Things like this have a habit of spreading on the Continent. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54701042

forumdedum

prunudo wrote: »

I heard his out burst a few months back on Pat Kenny's show. He was just jumping to wild conclusions and looking for somebody to blame. Unless he tracked down those 2 joggers and found out they were positive at that time it was just an uninformed fearmongering rant.

At least a while back there was proof you could catch it from passing joggers or cyclists and they generate more plume. I'm not a huge fan of Bill but I would believe him.