Are you adhering to the Households rule?

jackboy

jackboy wrote: »

They plummeted with level 3. The extra level 5 restrictions were not necessary.

No they didn’t.

jackboy

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

No they didn’t.

The drop in numbers seen during the first 3 weeks of level 5 restrictions were due to what happened before that time. It is known there is a lag. The effects of level 5 should just start to be noticeable about now.

VonLuck

jackboy wrote: »

The drop in numbers seen during the first 3 weeks of level 5 restrictions were due to what happened before that time. It is known there is a lag. The effects of level 5 should just start to be noticeable about now.

There is the argument that it is also linked to the announcement of Level 5 where people behaved more cautiously from then on.

is_that_so

VonLuck wrote: »

There is the argument that it is also linked to the announcement of Level 5 where people behaved more cautiously from then on.

That's a standard claim from NPHET every time they explain trends and has been used since March. There's nothing wrong with saying it but you would like to see them at least add it to their models.

mohawk

VonLuck wrote: »

There is the argument that it is also linked to the announcement of Level 5 where people behaved more cautiously from then on.

I wonder how true it is though about people being cautious. Some will change behaviour for sure but others will do the opposite
There was massive queues for toy shops the weekend before the Level 5 was announced. How many people went on one last session or last meal out before it that wouldn’t of been too bothered otherwise.

robbiezero

mohawk wrote: »

I wonder how true it is though about people being cautious. Some will change behaviour for sure but others will do the opposite
There was massive queues for toy shops the weekend before the Level 5 was announced. How many people went on one last session or last meal out before it that wouldn’t of been too bothered otherwise.

My local pub was packed the last night before it closed. Even a table of 75+ year olds were there.
There is nothing like the fear there this time. People are far more casual about it.
I see it in my local park at the foodmarkets at the weekend. People who would have been stepping into a ditch when passing others are now happily standing chatting in groups etc.
Very few that I know of are bothering with the 5KM rule or not visiting family.

bladespin

mohawk wrote: »

I wonder how true it is though about people being cautious. Some will change behaviour for sure but others will do the opposite
There was massive queues for toy shops the weekend before the Level 5 was announced. How many people went on one last session or last meal out before it that wouldn’t of been too bothered otherwise.

Nail on the head there, all the local pubs and restaurants, hair salons, barbers, toyshops etc were literally jammed just before it was brought in.

freshpopcorn

Even with funerals. Every Tom, dock and Harry is turning up to them. Especially when they are held in a private home.

bladespin

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Even with funerals. Every Tom, dock and Harry is turning up to them. Especially when they are held in a private home.

Not necessarily true, unfortunately we've been through three during this whole thing, two recently, all were very strictly controlled (and weird) especially the 'home' part, strange for both those visiting and the household.

freshpopcorn

bladespin wrote: »

Not necessarily true, unfortunately we've been through three during this whole thing, two recently, all were very strictly controlled (and weird) especially the 'home' part, strange for both those visiting and the household.

We’ve seen different things then I suppose.
Back in March people were great with them and staying away.
Now from I see people are turning up at the house and going in or they are all lining the road on top of one another to have a chat mainly.

They are fine in Funeral homes or the Church and they give a bit of lee way with number and would allow the odd extra person or two.

facehugger99

Will have the kid's cousins over for a sleepover tomorrow. Our kids were off in their house a couple of weekends ago.

I find it hard to believe that anyone still actually going along with the NPHET nonsense.

freshpopcorn

facehugger99 wrote: »

Will have the kid's cousins over for a sleepover tomorrow. Our kids were off in their house a couple of weekends ago.

I find it hard to believe that anyone still actually going along with the NPHET nonsense.

I have even seen social media stars(I know) they all on about masks and staying safe and they are all breaking the latest regulations.

ShineOn7

facehugger99 wrote: »

Will have the kid's cousins over for a sleepover tomorrow. Our kids were off in their house a couple of weekends ago.

Even though those kids would have been mingling around dozens of other children in school before they get to your household?

And their demographic have the highest amount of Asymptomatic spreaders?

VonLuck

facehugger99 wrote: »

Will have the kid's cousins over for a sleepover tomorrow. Our kids were off in their house a couple of weekends ago.

I find it hard to believe that anyone still actually going along with the NPHET nonsense.

Why is it nonsense? If everyone just stuck to the restrictions as per the guidelines, these "lockdowns" would be much shorter and less regular.

bladespin

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Even though those kids would have been mingling around dozens of other children in school before they get to your household?

And their demographic have the highest amount of Asymptomatic spreaders?

Think you post answers that, very difficult to argue against having other kids over when my own are surrounded by other children all day.

facehugger99

VonLuck wrote: »

Why is it nonsense? If everyone just stuck to the restrictions as per the guidelines, these "lockdowns" would be much shorter and less regular.

LOL - I doubt you even believe that nonsense yourself.

We have a health system that has been mismanaged for decades and we're now reaping the consequences of this - that's the only reason we have L5 restrictions

But I'm sure the bureaucrats and politicians who preside over this mess are delighted you think it's to do with kids having sleepovers.

VonLuck

facehugger99 wrote: »

LOL - I doubt you even believe that nonsense yourself.

We have a health system that has been mismanaged for decades and we're now reaping the consequences of this - that's the only reason we have L5 restrictions

But I'm sure the bureaucrats and politicians who preside over this mess are delighted you think it's to do with kids having sleepovers.

Are you suggesting that if we had a better health care system people wouldn't spread the virus to each other?

facehugger99

VonLuck wrote: »

Are you suggesting that if we had a better health care system people wouldn't spread the virus to each other?

:rolleyes: I think you're capable of reading and understanding my posts

However, given the amount of infections which have taken place within hospitals - yeah, it would help with that too.

Ironically it's people who are already in hospitals that are most at risk of both catching the disease and succumbing to it.

For the vast majority of the non-hospitalized population, it's completely harmless

Tacitus Kilgore

facehugger99 wrote: »

:rolleyes: I think you're capable of reading and understanding my posts

However, given the amount of infections which have taken place within hospitals - yeah, it would help with that too.

Ironically it's people who are already in hospitals that are most at risk of both catching the disease and succumbing to it.

For the vast majority of the non-hospitalized population, it's completely harmless

I think you have a scarily unhealthy obsession with being anti- everything when it comes to covid. Which, obviously, is fine, if it wasn't a 24/7 thing since, march....


For someone who likes to obsess about how much they don't follow the guidelines and think they're unnecessary. you sure do spend an insane amount of time talking about them.


It's odd. I hope you find a better hobby, cos the one you have is fair shit.

VonLuck

facehugger99 wrote: »

:rolleyes: I think you're capable of reading and understanding my posts

However, given the amount of infections which have taken place within hospitals - yeah, it would help with that too.

Ironically it's people who are already in hospitals that are most at risk of both catching the disease and succumbing to it.

For the vast majority of the non-hospitalized population, it's completely harmless

You're suggesting that because there has been mismanagement of the public healthcare system that we shouldn't make the extra effort. That's just nonsensical. It's not an issue that the HSE can resolve overnight, but your approach is "I didn't contribute to this problem so why should I help".

acequion

VonLuck wrote: »

You're suggesting that because there has been mismanagement of the public healthcare system that we shouldn't make the extra effort. That's just nonsensical. It's not an issue that the HSE can resolve overnight, but your approach is "I didn't contribute to this problem so why should I help".

He's actually completely right. While I don't agree with his dismissal of the restrictions because some are necessary and for our own protection, the fact is that we are so far up the creek because of the decades long massive mismanagement of our health service which is one of the worst in the developed world.

Yet somehow, though we all pay huge taxes, get all involved in our local and national elections, pinning our hopes time after time that each new administration will actually deliver, remember Enda Kenny at the start of this decade with his big notions about the health service we'd have by 2016!! Yet we still end up in 2020 with an unfit for purpose health service. And like eejits we're expected to suck that up and put our shoulder to the wheel now it's in big trouble! If someone vandalised your car would you get out and help him push it all the way to the scrap heap??

Because that's what's being asked of people and it really merits a two finger response!

Jim2007

acequion wrote: »

the fact is that we are so far up the creek because of the decades long massive mismanagement of our health service which is one of the worst in the developed world.

I don’t agree with this at all. The problem in Ireland is that there is a major disconnect between the service people expect and the one they are willing to pay for, with the failure to deliver assumed to be the cost of management, without any attempt to really estimate cost of the service people want.

I live in Switzerland. Our health department employs less than 500 people and we have no public health services. We also don’t have people on trolleys and the A&E waiting time is may be an hour. But at a cost of about two months gross wages for my family of four, so more than two months net.

I very much doubt the most Irish households would be willing to pay over two months salary a year to abolish trolleys or waiting times.

There needs to be a meaning full discussion on what is realistic and at what price.

Stormyteacup

Jim2007 wrote: »

I don’t agree with this at all. The problem in Ireland is that there is a major disconnect between the service people expect and the one they are willing to pay for, with the failure to deliver assumed to be the cost of management, without any attempt to really estimate cost of the service people want.

I live in Switzerland. Our health department employs less than 500 people and we have no public health services. We also don’t have people on trolleys and the A&E waiting time is may be an hour. But at a cost of about two months gross wages for my family of four, so more than two months net.

I very much doubt the most Irish households would be willing to pay over two months salary a year to abolish trolleys or waiting times.

There needs to be a meaning full discussion on what is realistic and at what price.

Out of interest, what subsidy from your government is on top of that?

Just to put it in perspective, Ireland planned on spending about €3,400 for every person in 2020 budget before extra spending on account of Covid.

For your family of four in Ireland, spend would have been €13,600. Not including visits to doctors, physios etc. unless you have a private policy in addition.

facehugger99

Jim2007 wrote: »

I don’t agree with this at all. The problem in Ireland is that there is a major disconnect between the service people expect and the one they are willing to pay for, with the failure to deliver assumed to be the cost of management, without any attempt to really estimate cost of the service people want.

I live in Switzerland. Our health department employs less than 500 people and we have no public health services. We also don’t have people on trolleys and the A&E waiting time is may be an hour. But at a cost of about two months gross wages for my family of four, so more than two months net.

I very much doubt the most Irish households would be willing to pay over two months salary a year to abolish trolleys or waiting times.

There needs to be a meaning full discussion on what is realistic and at what price.

A lot of people, myself included, wouldn't have an issue paying more in taxation for a better health service and most people understand it's an expensive service to deliver.

However, I have no confidence that additional funding would actually be spent on the service that the public gets, most of it would get gobbled up by the public service unions bloating the payroll and on improved pay, pensions and conditions for their members.

It's why, despite spending above the EU average on health we have such a ****e service and many of us pay extra for private insurance on top of all the taxations that goes on funding health.

But hey, Holohan and his 39 well-remunerated nodding dogs don't want you to be thinking too much about all that.

_Kaiser_

The problem with the HSE (as illustrated above) isn't with the funding it receives... it's how that funding is allocated/pissed away. Throwing more money at the problem won't fix it as we've seen with successive budgets.

VonLuck

acequion wrote: »

He's actually completely right. While I don't agree with his dismissal of the restrictions because some are necessary and for our own protection, the fact is that we are so far up the creek because of the decades long massive mismanagement of our health service which is one of the worst in the developed world.

Yet somehow, though we all pay huge taxes, get all involved in our local and national elections, pinning our hopes time after time that each new administration will actually deliver, remember Enda Kenny at the start of this decade with his big notions about the health service we'd have by 2016!! Yet we still end up in 2020 with an unfit for purpose health service. And like eejits we're expected to suck that up and put our shoulder to the wheel now it's in big trouble! If someone vandalised your car would you get out and help him push it all the way to the scrap heap??

Because that's what's being asked of people and it really merits a two finger response!

But to dismiss restrictions (which was the original argument) for those reasons doesn't make any sense.

Using your car analogy, it's like someone getting a flat tyre because they went into a pothole on a road in disrepair. The person asks you for help but you say "why should I? I didn't put the pothole there" and continue on with your journey.

That attitude is not going to help anyone.

ShineOn7

frozenfrozen wrote: »

we only have extra strong restrictions because people weren't respecting the earlier levels.

Exactly



And ignorance gets you this


https://twitter.com/astaines/status/1329122147118292994

doublejobbing 2

Absolutely no point adhering to a single rule. The virus will be brought back in to the country by returning emigrants and, slightly later, foreigners living here returning from hotspots in early to mid January.

Until the government outright bans foreign travel there is absolutely no point in co operating.

Gardesana Pecher

I was quite strict about rules and restrictions until recently. I've become more relaxed in the last few days. The government have made me more comfortable that there is no big bad bogey man in the form of reprisals out there.
I've probably stretched my walking routes to 6-7 km from home, and will be resuming camping soon.

bladespin

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

Absolutely no point adhering to a single rule. The virus will be brought back in to the country by returning emigrants and, slightly later, foreigners living here returning from hotspots in early to mid January.

Until the government outright bans foreign travel there is absolutely no point in co operating.

There's still over a thousand people a day flying in but travel represents just over 1% of infections, foreign travel isn't the bogey man.