Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Southampton' started by - Doing The Lambert Walk, Mar 12, 2020.
@Archers Road for PM
Yeah, can’t see that going well tbh.
Though I would be looking for a way for the Monopolies Commission to extend their remit to making football more competitive. A bit of wealth redistribution from the PL to the grass roots wouldn’t go amiss either.
I’d probably also bankrupt the country, get us thrown out of the UN, and forget to renew the insurance just before an asteroid hit, so on balance, better not
Yeah with that in mind, PM maybe a bit far. Maybe Health Secretary then
I know you have suspicions that the response may cause more long-term damage, I simply don't see any evidence of it, and neither do medical professionals (contra suggestions on here, the suicide rate in the US actually decreased in 2020 -- I'm having difficulty linking it, but it's "The Leading Causes of Death in the US for 2020", in the Journal of the American Medical Association). I see the areas where the disease spread uncontained, and can barely begin to imagine the collective trauma that has produced. Choosing that in order to have the trappings of normalcy just strikes me as totally rooted in a fantasy of what life would be like if we just shrugged and carried on.
Thus, for me, the issue is that you're setting up a false dichotomy, where on one hand you have lockdown and the other hand you have freedom. The problem is that life as normal isn't actually an option: Brazil tried that, and it not only resulted in rampant infection, it resulted in rampant reinfection, and people who caught COVID a second time fared far worse than they had the first. Brazilians are hardly cheering Bolsonaro's approach: few if any governments in the world have seen as much of a drop in both approval of their handling of COVID and popularity as a whole, which strongly suggests that pretending the disease away is not merely bad policy, but bad politics.
I understand the natural inclination toward "the government can't tell me what to do", but frankly if the only thing keeping people from making terrible decisions is the government, then that in and of itself is a problem. As a leftist, I believe that the purpose of government is to step in to right imbalances that society itself seems unwilling or unable to correct, and I can think of few situations where that is more true than when some choose to prioritize their own creature comforts over the lives of hundreds of thousands of their fellow citizens. It would be nice if this could all be done voluntarily, but if the populace proves unwilling or unable to do so itself, it is the proper role of government to take measures to protect the common good.
These lockdowns have not balanced anything. They have deepened imbalance.
Come on, we all know there is never an either or situation. There are other ways through this than total lockdown Vs no lockdown. You are setting up the false dichotomy yourself as I never read anyone say the solution to total lockdown is no lockdowns. Short lockdowns at the right time. Heavily enforced lockdowns and support of vulnerables. These are two basic approaches that are neither this kind of extended lockdown nor are they no lockdown.
I actually agree on shorter lockdowns. But there's the rub: because the tail of the curve is longer than the upslope, the longer you wait on those lockdowns, the longer the lockdown has to be. It isn't a 1:1 ratio. You can't have a short circuit-breaker lockdown when you have 30,000 cases a day; it's pointless, because two weeks won't reduce it sufficiently. But you can if you've done the work to get it down to a fraction of that.
When you fail to act swiftly, the net result is that you have to wait much longer to get back to a point where reopening is feasible, and if you reopen too early, you also guarantee that you're going to have a longer period of lockdown thereafter. The UK reopened too early in late 2020, at a time when caseloads were shrinking but still quite high, because of the possible political consequences of being in lockdown through Christmas. And when cases started to gather steam, the government delayed action until after the holiday season. The long lockdown is purely a product of that political calculation.
I agree with all of this and I doubt that anyone could have worded that better. Beautifully written Archers, and very much appreciated.
My best mate Sheila has been working with groups of disadvantaged youngsters, planting thousands of appropriate trees to re-wild areas that have been stripped of most of its natural tree cover. I have helped out where I could but because of the travel restrictions the only thing I could do in recent months was to keep Sheila afloat with cash and to get some useful food stuff shipped up to them in the wilds of Scotland. The point of mentioning this is that Sheila has seen first hand the damage the lockdowns have done to the kids not involved with the tree planting. Many of the young people she knows, and their families, have suffered greatly by way of lack of finances, self esteem and a sense of never ending hopeless isolation.
Lockdowns are tolerable if you manage to get financial support from the government and if you have the means to use the time to do other things but for families who are overlooked, it can often be a living nightmare. I can't imagine what it must be like to have young children living in a block of flats when there is literally nothing they can do to relieve the boredom. We are social animals and apart from those few who choose to live an isolated existence, being in touch with others is an essential part of life. If that ability to socialise is removed then it can often lead to serious mental problems and we just don't have the mental health services to help those who are suffering.
I am one of the lucky ones. I have a house, a garden and an allotment. I have managed to save enough that I am ok financially, even on a basic government pension but even I have found it very lonely at times. The internet has been a saviour and this forum one of the highlights of a rather dull existence at times so thanks for the laughs, the silliness and the sense that we are going to get through this at some point.
A crisis in the USA....there is a shortage of tomato ketchup packets because of the increased demand for takeaway meals. Never rains, but it pours.
Something smaller - maybe Minister for Cheese, but there are others on this forum far better qualified than me for the post.
Surely this calls for Ronald Koeman to fly in and advocate the use of mayo on their fries?
Anyone who has mayo instead of ketchup with their chips should be ashamed of themselves. Sin against nature.
May I be so bold to suggest a mixture of mayo, tommy k with a dash of sriracha hot chili sauce? Yogurt mayo, chopped cucumber/gerkins and garlic also good. Only your imagination limits the flavour combinations.
Yeah, because ketchup is a natural product
Shiips without Mayo aren’t Shiips
Haircut this week
6 days time for me.
I’ve gone DIY this lockdown...
I have long hair now, don’t think I’ll revert to short hair again until my parents have had their second jab and I’ve had my first. Probably safe but I’ve waited this long, I can wait a few more months to be sure.
Going bald makes it so much easier......grade 1 all over, job done.