DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 54714--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: guest465
Date: December 15, 2020, 1:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Kermitpower link ---
>
> At the risk of being political, I'd have to disagree with
that. The problem isn't with people trying to live their lives,
it's with the government telling them not to! >:(
>
> In the first 6 months of the year, there were 40,645 Covid
deaths from 127,380 hospitalizations. In the second 6 months,
there have been a further 23,280 from 109,053.
>
> Think back to the start of all this.... The streets were like
ghost towns, people were scared, the rules were being obeyed by
pretty much everyone... Whenever anyone posted that they'd been
out for a fun ride on the MTB forums I visit they'd be ripped
apart by the vast majority accusing them of being selfish
because they might kill Covid patients if they made an ambulance
come and pick them up from the trails instead.
>
> Now, though, we've been through "eat out to help out", the
government has encouraged people back in to work, the shops have
looked pretty much like normal, and the MTB forums are full of
people complaining that trails in the Surrey Hills are going to
be shut down because so many more people are riding them than
they ever did before lockdown.
>
> If it was this behaviour causing the problems, then you'd
expect hospitalisations and deaths to be increasing, but they're
not! The number of people being hospitalised with Covid has
fallen, and the chance of dying if you do catch it has dropped
from 1 in 3 for the first half of the year to 1 in 4.7
>
> If you then go and take a look at Twickenham itself on the
link below, you'll see that Twickenham North, the home of the
Stoop is being plunged into the highest tier of restrictions
with a horrific infection rate of 56.7 per 100,000! Widen that
out to LB Richmond and that rises to 115.1 per 100,000 compared
to a UK average of 173.5!
>
> Going back to those deaths, sadly 110 people had died within
28 days of a positive Covid death in Richmond in the first 6
months of the year. In the second half of the year?
Twenty-two!
>
>
HTML https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/search?postcode=tw2+7sx
>
> The actions being taken now are a complete and utter joke!!!
Right at the start of lockdown, the hospitals pushed loads of
old people out into nursing homes to make space for Covid
patients, not realising that many of them were infected and also
infectious but asymptomatic, and as a result half the first
40,000 deaths were amongst nursing home residents, of whom there
were about 800,000 at the start of the year. meaning 1 in 20
nursing home residents died, along with one in 3,300 of the non
nursing home population as a whole, or one in 13,500 of the
population under the age of 65.
>
> They screwed up at the start, and a cynic could be forgiven
for thinking that everything since has been about trying to make
us all accept that this disease poses a risk to the general
population to try and disguise that fact.
>
> Remember Patrick Vallence announcing in late September that
without further action the UK could expect to see 50,000 new
cases a day by mid October and 200+ deaths per day by mid
November? From then until mid October, the government basically
took bugger all action, and what happened? A rolling 7 day
average of 17,592 new infections on October 15th, but 449 deaths
reported on November 15th.
>
> At this point, of course, with a third the number of projected
cases causing more than twice the number of projected deaths,
maybe you'd think we should be panicking! Then again, we're
measuring deaths as anyone who dies within 28 days of a positive
test, and every single person admitted to hospital is tested, so
you could be taken in having lost both your legs in a freak
smoothie-making accident, be tested as positive on the way in
before bleeding out in theatre and you'd count as a Covid death
even if you'd not had so much as a single symptom, but never let
it be said they're just plucking the numbers out of their arses
as they go along!
>
> Did I have Racing tickets, I hear you ask? Yes, I bloody well
did!!! Am I gutted about missing out? Absolutely! I'm almost
as gutted about that as I am about seeing how upset my 12yr old
is about it. Having said that, what right have I got to be
bitter? I've still got my job unlike millions, and haven't been
given a terminal cancer diagnosis as a result of testing being
suspended because of Covid, so I guess I should count my
blessings...
>
--- End Quote ---
What utter garbage ... Netherlands Germany belt are going into
full lockdown. I suppose that’s Boris Johnson’s fault too!
People are dying, I was seriously ill and continue to suffers
from “covid long” yet you moan about not getting into a sports
ground .. get a grip please
#Post#: 54717--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: Kermitpower
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bampotbill link ---
>
> What utter garbage ... Netherlands Germany belt are going into
full lockdown. I suppose that’s Boris Johnson’s fault too!
People are dying, I was seriously ill and continue to suffers
from “covid long” yet you moan about not getting into a sports
ground .. get a grip please
--- End Quote ---
It's not just our government coming out with utter garbage, I'll
grant you that.
Not getting to go to the match is, as I said, a fairly trivial
concern in the wider picture, but it is nevertheless symptomatic
of the absurdity of one size fits all policies. LB Richmond has
a well below average Covid rate of 137 per 100,000, so why shut
the Stoop down based on other areas in London having high
levels, whilst other stadia on other areas get to stay open (eg
Kingsholm at 208)?
The main point, though, is that for some unfathomable reason
this mass hysteria has taken over and nothing but Covid seems to
matter! It doesn't matter that 8,000 women alone missed breast
cancer diagnoses because screening was suspended to protect the
NHS from Covid, that 3,500 people have been given terminal
diagnoses for other forms of cancer with an average loss of
16-19 years of life, or that London Ambulance have seen their
call outs to suicide attempts almost double this year, mostly
amongst young men, that over 800,000 people have lost their jobs
in spite of the Furlough scheme, that millions of kids have had
their education ripped apart, or that we've incurred an increase
in national debt equal to almost three times the entire NHS
national budget to do this.
All that matters is that for political reasons our government
(and many others) have implemented sledgehammer policies that
have a huge impact on vast numbers to address an illness with an
average age of death of 82, half of them from care homes, at
least a quarter already with a terminal condition, over 90%
above retirement age and only 1% of working age without known
pre-existing conditions.
What makes more sense to you?
1. Ask the vulnerable to self-isolate until they can get
vaccinated and let the 80% of the population who aren't
vulnerable get on with living and earning the tax money to pay
for everything.
2. Limiting things for everyone, whether at risk or not, at the
expense of more billions in lost tax revenue, billions in
increased furlough expenditure, lost education, etc, etc....
Covid isn't going anywhere! we'll lock down again, bankrupt a
few more companies, break a few more kids, then we'll open up
again and it'll just spread again. What's the point? When does
the damage done become so great that the NHS has to turn round
and say "sorry, we're not going to be able to treat cancer for
the next 5 years", for example?
So yes, flippant to maybe complain about losing out on the one
bit of light relief to look forward to after a completely,
utterly shit year, but that just happened to be the latest straw
on the camel's back alongside a third of my colleagues having
lost their jobs and my daughter's A levels being completely
screwed. >:(
#Post#: 54719--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: baggie
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Bampotbill link ---
>
> What utter garbage ... Netherlands Germany belt are going into
full lockdown. I suppose that’s Boris Johnson’s fault too!
People are dying, I was seriously ill and continue to suffers
from “covid long” yet you moan about not getting into a sports
ground .. get a grip please
>
--- End Quote ---
If you have had COVID and are still suffering then I sympathise
and I wish you a speedy and full recovery
I caught the virus in France in March ... had a horrible cough
for 6 weeks but recovered without medical intervention ... I had
the test to show I was clear of the virus and a positive blood
test to show I had the antibodies ... the government’s
nonsensical “one size fits all” quarantine policy has
effectively put me under “house arrest” for 6 months ... you and
I could meet for a beer and not represent a a danger to each
other ... or anyone else for that matter
It is a bit like parents telling their children to eat up all of
their meals because there are children starving in Africa !
No need to shut down sports grounds for me and, I suspect, for
millions of people like me ... even during the Great Plague in
the mid-17th Century they issued Certificates of Good Health so
that people who had no symptoms could move about freely ...
granted the system was subject to fraud and forgery but surely
350 years later we have the technology to put something better
in place whilst still protecting the people who remain
vulnerable
The photos used in the media reports yesterday to justify London
moving into Tier 3 were ludicrous showing crowded shopping
streets ... I was on Regents Street last Wednesday and it was
empty ... Hamleys was all but deserted ... people who were there
on Saturday say it was just the same ... those photos were
clearly old photos from Christmas “past” ... not this year ...
what is wrong with our journalists that they have lost the power
of “critical thinking” and the ability to challenge what is in
front of them ... too much time spent in front of a computer
screen putting “stories” together based on the utterances on
social media rather than being “out on the ground” to discover
the truth
#Post#: 54720--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: TeddingtonQuin
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't want to take this thread further off topic but I'll just
throw in that really, it should never have got to this point. We
have an advantage over our near neighbours that should have
prevented all this. We're a flipping island (or a collection of
small islands) and thus we have a big natural barrier to
incoming diseases. If our govt had taken appropriate steps,
quickly enough, we wouldn't be in this mess!!
#Post#: 54721--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Kermitpower link ---
>
> At the risk of being political, I'd have to disagree with
that. The problem isn't with people trying to live their lives,
it's with the government telling them not to! >:(
>
> In the first 6 months of the year, there were 40,645 Covid
deaths from 127,380 hospitalizations. In the second 6 months,
there have been a further 23,280 from 109,053.
>
> Think back to the start of all this.... The streets were like
ghost towns, people were scared, the rules were being obeyed by
pretty much everyone... Whenever anyone posted that they'd been
out for a fun ride on the MTB forums I visit they'd be ripped
apart by the vast majority accusing them of being selfish
because they might kill Covid patients if they made an ambulance
come and pick them up from the trails instead.
>
> Now, though, we've been through "eat out to help out", the
government has encouraged people back in to work, the shops have
looked pretty much like normal, and the MTB forums are full of
people complaining that trails in the Surrey Hills are going to
be shut down because so many more people are riding them than
they ever did before lockdown.
>
> If it was this behaviour causing the problems, then you'd
expect hospitalisations and deaths to be increasing, but they're
not! The number of people being hospitalised with Covid has
fallen, and the chance of dying if you do catch it has dropped
from 1 in 3 for the first half of the year to 1 in 4.7
--- End Quote ---
The death rate is not going to be like the first wave because we
have a much stronger idea of how to treat patients. I'm not sure
if you're claiming that hospitalisations and deaths
aren't/didn't increase overall - because that's not true, both
happened - or whether you're talking just locally (which also
happened but to a lesser degree).
Certainly people out on bikes doesn't appear to be a big issue;
we know from studies that outdoor activity like that isn't a
likely cause of transmission. Dunno how many people would be
wearing masks when doing it, though (which would help a lot).
Eat Out To Help Out was a disastrous idea.
--- Quote ---
> If you then go and take a look at Twickenham itself on the
link below, you'll see that Twickenham North, the home of the
Stoop is being plunged into the highest tier of restrictions
with a horrific infection rate of 56.7 per 100,000! Widen that
out to LB Richmond and that rises to 115.1 per 100,000 compared
to a UK average of 173.5!
>
> Going back to those deaths, sadly 110 people had died within
28 days of a positive Covid death in Richmond in the first 6
months of the year. In the second half of the year?
Twenty-two!
>
>
HTML https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/search?postcode=tw2+7sx
>
> The actions being taken now are a complete and utter joke!!!
Right at the start of lockdown, the hospitals pushed loads of
old people out into nursing homes to make space for Covid
patients, not realising that many of them were infected and also
infectious but asymptomatic, and as a result half the first
40,000 deaths were amongst nursing home residents, of whom there
were about 800,000 at the start of the year. meaning 1 in 20
nursing home residents died, along with one in 3,300 of the non
nursing home population as a whole, or one in 13,500 of the
population under the age of 65.
>
> They screwed up at the start, and a cynic could be forgiven
for thinking that everything since has been about trying to make
us all accept that this disease poses a risk to the general
population to try and disguise that fact.
>
> Remember Patrick Vallence announcing in late September that
without further action the UK could expect to see 50,000 new
cases a day by mid October and 200+ deaths per day by mid
November? From then until mid October, the government basically
took bugger all action, and what happened? A rolling 7 day
average of 17,592 new infections on October 15th, but 449 deaths
reported on November 15th.
--- End Quote ---
The government did actually introduce a bunch of stuff in late
September to make a difference. The Test & Trace app launched 3
days after Whitty's comments, and on the same day a wide range
of new restrictions came in (face coverings, table service,
closing times, support group sides, rule of 6 for indoor
organised sport, 'work from home if you can'). then a few days
later, more restrictions on gatherings, a legal duty to
self-isolate, fines for businesses re: COVID-19 Secure
requirements.
That's quite a lot. Without that, it's entirely possible we'd
have hit 50k a day - especially when you see the big rise in
infections around this time.
I'd also make the point that you don't bring in restrictions
when the deaths are high - you do it when the cases are rising
to prevent the deaths getting high. Richmond might be doing "OK"
but you can't really do restrictions on small areas - people
travel, particularly within cities - and just because they're at
137.4 cases per 100k (latest stats, it's going up across the
board in the capital) doesn't mean that London taken as a whole
isn't pretty bad. It's over 180 where I am, and there's parts of
London in the 300/400/500 region.
--- Quote ---
> At this point, of course, with a third the number of projected
cases causing more than twice the number of projected deaths,
maybe you'd think we should be panicking! Then again, we're
measuring deaths as anyone who dies within 28 days of a positive
test, and every single person admitted to hospital is tested, so
you could be taken in having lost both your legs in a freak
smoothie-making accident, be tested as positive on the way in
before bleeding out in theatre and you'd count as a Covid death
even if you'd not had so much as a single symptom, but never let
it be said they're just plucking the numbers out of their arses
as they go along!
--- End Quote ---
They don't mention Covid on the death certificate [the method
used by the ONS to calculate Covid deaths) unless it's an
underlying cause or a contributory cause. So no, that's not what
happens. They do also measure people who had a positive test and
later died, but policy works on the former, and those figures
track with what the government's been saying.
The most recent "confirmed cases" numbers for London make for
some worrying reading. It's a big old jump.
Sadly the Government's faffed about so much and contradicted
itself so much that it's heavily damaged the only tools at its
disposal.
#Post#: 54726--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: JammyGit
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Kermitpower link ---
>
> 1. Ask the vulnerable to self-isolate until they can get
vaccinated and let the 80% of the population who aren't
vulnerable get on with living and earning the tax money to pay
for everything.
--- End Quote ---
There is no workable solution for this. It is an impossible
task. You're also asking people who aren't "vulnerable" to risk
a serious disease with potentially life-changing consequences
and letting the virus run rampant. Yeah great, it only kills
some tiny percentage of people who aren't considered vulnerable.
Scale that up, and it's a lot of deaths, a massively overwhelmed
health service, and a completely out of control situation. How
are all those people with undiagnosed cancer going to be better
off by living in a society where the virus is allowed to run
free?
It's simply a pipedream.
--- Quote ---
> 2. Limiting things for everyone, whether at risk or not, at
the expense of more billions in lost tax revenue, billions in
increased furlough expenditure, lost education, etc, etc....
>
> Covid isn't going anywhere! we'll lock down again, bankrupt a
few more companies, break a few more kids, then we'll open up
again and it'll just spread again. What's the point? When does
the damage done become so great that the NHS has to turn round
and say "sorry, we're not going to be able to treat cancer for
the next 5 years", for example?
>
> So yes, flippant to maybe complain about losing out on the one
bit of light relief to look forward to after a completely,
utterly **** year, but that just happened to be the latest straw
on the camel's back alongside a third of my colleagues having
lost their jobs and my daughter's A levels being completely
screwed. >:(
>
--- End Quote ---
The good news is we now have vaccines! So this will hopefully be
a temporary state of affairs.
Look, I understand the frustration, the angst, the anger at all
of this. The Government's approach has essentially ended up
being the worst of both worlds. It's an absolute mess. But any
proposed solution that leads to exponential growth of the virus
will see an unconscionable amount of deaths and long term
illnesses - and would destroy our economy regardless.
#Post#: 54727--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: MadMax
Date: December 15, 2020, 4:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Oh good another discussion on how well Covid is being handled.
#Post#: 54728--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: Fearless Fred
Date: December 15, 2020, 5:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Back on to the topic, I can't see our game against Bristol six
days after the Racing game having any crowd in either. We may be
lucky with the LI game but I wouldn't bet on it if they go ahead
with the relaxation of the rules over Christmas.
#Post#: 54729--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: TomBuckQuin
Date: December 15, 2020, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Kermitpower link ---
>
> It's not just our government coming out with utter garbage,
I'll grant you that.
>
> Not getting to go to the match is, as I said, a fairly trivial
concern in the wider picture, but it is nevertheless symptomatic
of the absurdity of one size fits all policies. LB Richmond has
a well below average Covid rate of 137 per 100,000, so why shut
the Stoop down based on other areas in London having high
levels, whilst other stadia on other areas get to stay open (eg
Kingsholm at 208)?
>
> The main point, though, is that for some unfathomable reason
this mass hysteria has taken over and nothing but Covid seems to
matter! It doesn't matter that 8,000 women alone missed breast
cancer diagnoses because screening was suspended to protect the
NHS from Covid, that 3,500 people have been given terminal
diagnoses for other forms of cancer with an average loss of
16-19 years of life, or that London Ambulance have seen their
call outs to suicide attempts almost double this year, mostly
amongst young men, that over 800,000 people have lost their jobs
in spite of the Furlough scheme, that millions of kids have had
their education ripped apart, or that we've incurred an increase
in national debt equal to almost three times the entire NHS
national budget to do this.
>
> All that matters is that for political reasons our government
(and many others) have implemented sledgehammer policies that
have a huge impact on vast numbers to address an illness with an
average age of death of 82, half of them from care homes, at
least a quarter already with a terminal condition, over 90%
above retirement age and only 1% of working age without known
pre-existing conditions.
>
> What makes more sense to you?
>
> 1. Ask the vulnerable to self-isolate until they can get
vaccinated and let the 80% of the population who aren't
vulnerable get on with living and earning the tax money to pay
for everything.
>
> 2. Limiting things for everyone, whether at risk or not, at
the expense of more billions in lost tax revenue, billions in
increased furlough expenditure, lost education, etc, etc....
>
> Covid isn't going anywhere! we'll lock down again, bankrupt a
few more companies, break a few more kids, then we'll open up
again and it'll just spread again. What's the point? When does
the damage done become so great that the NHS has to turn round
and say "sorry, we're not going to be able to treat cancer for
the next 5 years", for example?
>
> So yes, flippant to maybe complain about losing out on the one
bit of light relief to look forward to after a completely,
utterly **** year, but that just happened to be the latest straw
on the camel's back alongside a third of my colleagues having
lost their jobs and my daughter's A levels being completely
screwed. >:(
>
--- End Quote ---
For a little bit of balance (and I actually sympathise with your
argument to a large extent and think you're probably not far
from having it much more worked out than the Govt), I'm a 30
year old with a condition that means I fall into the "extremely
at risk" group. A nasty cold left me on the brink of death a few
years back (hospitalised early Jan 2015, in an induced coma the
next day, in ICU on a ventilator for 2 months with pneumonia and
sepsis - the docs gave me a 15% chance of survival at one
point)...
Obviously, with that medical history in mind, I haven't left
home since early March this year. Whenever lockdowns have been
lifted and shielding officially been declared "no longer
necessary", I have continued to shield. I haven't begrudged any
healthy person having their taste of freedom each time a
lockdown has been lifted - trust me, I want to taste that as
much as the next person. Most of my friends grew bored of
lockdowns months ago - and I get it, I really do. That's before
we even begin to look at the devastation to the economy, the NHS
backlog (and associated knock-ons of aborting cancer treatments
etc).
The one caveat I'd apply to your very well reasoned arguments is
that this virus, unlike the flu, is so incredibly catchy. I
actually don't know whether I agree with you that we should let
the 80% crack on while I continue to wait patiently with the
rest of the 20% for these imminent vaccines. There's so much
merit to that argument. And yet, for someone like me, there are
so many intricate complications that come if that approach were
to be applied. I require 24/7 care - provided by local
council-funded, privately recruited Personal Care Assistants
(PCAs). In normal times, my team of two PCAs work on 2-week-on,
2-week-off shifts, living with me when they are on their 2 week
shift. Without them I have no independent life - I'd be a burden
on my family, wouldn't be able to work, would almost certainly
be all kinds of depressed (who wouldn't in that scenario?)
When Covid first came to the UK I received a phone call from my
consultant telling me that regrettably they were having to call
their patients to advise that the most likely scenario, if I
were to catch Covid, would be that I would be denied access to a
ventilator in favour of someone more likely to survive. Again,
candidly, I understood - they weren't telling me that I had any
less right to a life than anyone else, but they had to offer
this pragmatic, realistic assessment of the pressures the NHS
was about to come under and some of the difficult decisions they
would therefore have to make.
I immediately locked down with my family (mum, dad and 2 younger
brothers - all healthy, no pre-existing conditions) and told my
PCAs to stay away while I worked out what I could possibly do to
continue my care provision safely and thus not have to rely on
my 60-year-old dad providing all my intensive personal care. We
finally managed to find a place for my PCAs to
self-isolate/quarantine for 2 weeks prior to their shift each
time - but this time sitting around in self isolation would be
deemed working time, while the other PCA was still working with
me - meaning weeks and months of negotiations with the local
council to line up extra funding for these 2 week isolation
periods. They finally agreed in September - but with the proviso
that my PCAs would have to do much longer shifts each time (6
weeks minimum) to reduce the cost implications as much as
reasonably possible.
Brexit adds an additional layer of complexity for me - my PCAs
are Hungarian, live in Hungary and commute to the UK for their
shift each time (yes, believe it or not, the majority of people
I know with the same/similar condition to me run their PCA care
this way). They will no longer be able to work for me after 31
December. I have been in ongoing discussions with the council
around how I can possibly recruit a new team of PCAs under these
already exhaustingly complicated mechanisms I've had to cobble
together. We're still none the wiser - how can I ask someone I
don't know from Adam to self isolate for 2 weeks (paid) before
arriving for a trial shift of a few days (again, paid) to
possibly find out they're not up to task? And rinse and repeat
until I find two that are - and are willing to do minimum 6
weeks at a time until they and I are vaccinated. So
realistically the early months of next year will fall on my dad
again.
And that's all a very long and winding preamble to the dichotomy
at play in my mind: yes, I want the 80% to crack on, the country
to crack on, the economy to salvage whatever's left and rebuild.
But then I look at how the one constant in all of this has been
my family - all 4 of them healthy, all 4 of them shielding with
me for 10 long months - because if one of my PCAs were to fall
ill at any time I'd have no choice but to fall back on them. My
girlfriend too - perfectly healthy - has locked down with me for
extended periods (with the 2 weeks of self isolation prior each
time), to provide additional support. All 5 of those healthy
people essentially kept at home because of 1 extremely at risk
person (in this case me). I do struggle with that guilt every
now and then.
Now I know my situation is unusual, and I don't for a second
think that my life is worth any more than that person who has
gone from having treatable cancer to terminal cancer because of
all of this. Or the person who has ended up on the dole, queuing
up at food banks to feed their family. But I do worry about the
social care system if we were to just let the 80% do their thing
and as a result let it spread completely unchecked. I worry
about people with conditions like me, but without the support
systems that I have, or the belligerence to harass the council
for a simple answer to a question for days on end. And I do
worry about the numbers - because whilst the mortality rates
compare with the likes of flu, the amount of people catching
this thing is astronomical. Without the lockdowns it would have
been worse - I'm sure you'd agree with that. I take your point -
how much worse, we will probably never know. And whilst my
family and I will continue to do our thing and I will do
everything I can not to be one of those NHS statistics, anything
more than what they've experienced already is going to be
catastrophic. Those cancer treatments are already being paused
again - they can't start them up again until the numbers come
under control (don't forget that bringing someone who's
receiving chemo into a hospital full of Covid is a potential
death sentence in itself).
I guess this is all a very long winded way of saying that there
are no easy answers here - my only prevailing thought is that
having come this far and being so close to the vaccine, is it
really the time to let the dog off the leash now? If the
vaccines were nowhere near then I think I'd be inclined to agree
with large parts of your sweeping policy change proposal and I'd
happily (for want of a better word, none of this is really happy
stuff) hunker down for the long haul with the rest of the 20%
and their +5s. I'm constantly trying to keep myself on an even
keel and put myself in the shoes of your average healthy
business owner whose life has been affected in a completely
different way to mine. And with all that nuance thrown in, I've
come to the conclusion that there is no right or wrong answer.
There is no policy that can possibly strike the right balance.
And on that bleak note, I think that's all I came here to say
and Admin can now move this thread to the non-rugby section
(sorry).
#Post#: 54730--------------------------------------------------
Re: Racing 92 - London into Tier 3
DIR By: Kermitpower
Date: December 15, 2020, 6:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TomBuckQuin link ---
> Lots of really thoughtful stuff about live in carers...
--- End Quote ---
Thanks for taking the time to add so much detail on your
personal situation. I think it lets me summarise a couple of my
thoughts really well.
1. Unfortunately, you and others with similar conditions
would've had to lock yourselves away for the duration whatever
from the sounds of it. That is what it is - a pretty shitty
situation - but clearly made so much worse for you feeling
guilty about locking in your closest as well?
2. So far, the government has spent an estimated £40Bn+ just on
furloughing people alone who, for the vast majority, were at no
particular risk.
Given the option, I would've been inclined to furlough just
those people with a clearly increased risk (thus saving £30Bn+,
at a rough guess) and then paying your carers a £10k hardship
bonus after each care period. That should hopefully be a
massive incentive for people on typically low wages to want to
make the sacrifice involved, give you and others in your
position the care you need without the guilt of imposing on your
family, let the rest of the population crack on with earning the
tax to pay for it, and hopefully still save a fortune compared
to furloughing everyone?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page