SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,444
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I lead a team of software developers in a large company. There are 200 of us in the IT department, working from home is optional, no questions asked. Out of those 200, around 40 come to work anyway and there are around 800 people in the company building in total, a half of which work from the office.

We had a confirmed coronavirus case with one of our programmers last week and everyone in contact were asked to isolate. So far, three people sharing the office with her were confirmed positive and our head of department lost his sense of smell and taste today.

In the meantime, he refused to isolate and was coming to work every day. He constantly moves from one office to another, has had dozens of meetings and even held 3 on-site job interviews this week.

Talk about a super spreader..
Can’t you report him to HR or something? That’s disgraceful, surely everyone knows loss of smell is a key sign?
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,228
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
I’ll be honest, my first thought was same as Stan. You want your head read lad.
You need to have had a negative Covid test in the last three days to get into Cyprus, so am hoping the flight should be pretty safe, if we're all clean. Can't imagine it's that much more risky there than here- it's warm there so we'll eat outside etc...
 

Hound Dog

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
3,192
Location
Belgrade, Serbia
Supports
Whoever I bet on
Can’t you report him to HR or something? That’s disgraceful, surely everyone knows loss of smell is a key sign?
He actually started isolating after losing his smell.

The problem are the previous 8 days, when he was walking around freely despite having been in contact with a confirmed case, while all others who had contact with that person have isolated.

The head of HR went ballistic on him over the phone today but the damage has been done already.

He is also very high up (as I said, head of the IT department, only the company owner is above him) so not like HR can do anything to him.

What is also remarkable is that he is one of the nicest persons I met in my life and anyone who knows him will say the same. No one has any idea why he did what he did.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829
There's a big difference to being down 50% and down 100% (completely shut). Cash burn for a business grows exponentially as you lower sales further beyond their breakeven point.
Isn't there more to it than just sales though? In the scenario where sales are down 50%, costs are not far enough 100%, while in the scenario where sales are down 100%, surely costs are down a lot? And that's without considering any external intervention. The notion of "re-opening the economy" is based on the premise that if enough restrictions are removed, government can let businesses get back to doing their own thing and government can retreat into its rightful place. Not in all scenarios but that's the general position taken.

The data seems to suggest that's a fallacy, and the net consequence of that could be more bankruptcies and unemployment. At least part of the reason the US congress have held off on more stimulus is the belief in that fallacy. If they had understood the reality of the situation they might have decided it was better to shut down some parts of the economy and provide support to cover the much lower costs, rather than "allowing" them to run the business in a consistently unprofitable situation that is a direct consequence of their public health policy.
 

van der star

newprawn warrior
Scout
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
8,935
Location
San Siro
Italy is verging on another lockdown. Lombardy has already implemented partial lockdown rules and a curfew and other regions are following suit, but the exponential rise in ICU admissions in the last few days basically means that these restrictions might be too little too late. I don't see how the country can survive another full lockdown, even if it's just for a month. So many local businesses went under during the first one.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829


The situation in NI seems bizarre when put in that context. I suppose it's just another case of areas that were lucky in spring being unlucky in Autumn but damn that's a big hit
 

redshaw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
9,586
Today's numbers - Actual positives, discharged/recovered, expired, total cases.
What's the feeling in Italy on the cause? Up to 19k cases now.

They were low for a long time while cases started to rise in Spain France, Belgium Holland then UK. Italy and Germany looked to keeping things ok. I know one Italian based poster here said it's the schools.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,444
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You need to have had a negative Covid test in the last three days to get into Cyprus, so am hoping the flight should be pretty safe, if we're all clean. Can't imagine it's that much more risky there than here- it's warm there so we'll eat outside etc...
And what if you get stuck there? What If either of you need hospitalised? I hope you have extra “what if” funds set aside. I think you’re mad
 

MTF

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,243
Location
New York City
Isn't there more to it than just sales though? In the scenario where sales are down 50%, costs are not far enough 100%, while in the scenario where sales are down 100%, surely costs are down a lot? And that's without considering any external intervention. The notion of "re-opening the economy" is based on the premise that if enough restrictions are removed, government can let businesses get back to doing their own thing and government can retreat into its rightful place. Not in all scenarios but that's the general position taken.

The data seems to suggest that's a fallacy, and the net consequence of that could be more bankruptcies and unemployment. At least part of the reason the US congress have held off on more stimulus is the belief in that fallacy. If they had understood the reality of the situation they might have decided it was better to shut down some parts of the economy and provide support to cover the much lower costs, rather than "allowing" them to run the business in a consistently unprofitable situation that is a direct consequence of their public health policy.
So what I mean is that certain businesses can maybe break-even or lose less even if their demand is reduced. But when you're shutdown and have 0 sales, that is the maximum your losses can be at because certain fixed costs like rent and manager salaries you just can't get away from. It's also the state in which you pay the fewest employees, order nothing from suppliers, etc.

Businesses might find that if their demand were to be down 80% it is still preferable to just stay closed than incur the basic costs of opening, but that is a decision they're able to come to through probably a few weeks of discovery. All I'm saying is that it does not get worse than being mandated to be closed.

By now there's not a country in Europe or the Americas at least that can realistically pursue a policy of eradication. Now I'm not saying that means that we should just open up and let the virus rip through. This is exactly the dilemma that all countries face now. What I can't agree to now vs might have agreed to in March, is this notion that businesses and the economy in the will be better off with shutdowns, which was based on the premise that shutdowns would enable essentially eradication followed by a return to full or close to full normality.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons


The situation in NI seems bizarre when put in that context. I suppose it's just another case of areas that were lucky in spring being unlucky in Autumn but damn that's a big hit
If that was the case everywhere we could start to speculate about immunity taking the edge off the second wave but, unfortunately, Lombardy seems to be getting slammed all over again.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829
So what I mean is that certain businesses can maybe break-even or lose less even if their demand is reduced. But when you're shutdown and have 0 sales, that is the maximum your losses can be at because certain fixed costs like rent and manager salaries you just can't get away from. It's also the state in which you pay the fewest employees, order nothing from suppliers, etc.

Businesses might find that if their demand were to be down 80% it is still preferable to just stay closed than incur the basic costs of opening, but that is a decision they're able to come to through probably a few weeks of discovery. All I'm saying is that it does not get worse than being mandated to be closed.

By now there's not a country in Europe or the Americas at least that can realistically pursue a policy of eradication. Now I'm not saying that means that we should just open up and let the virus rip through. This is exactly the dilemma that all countries face now. What I can't agree to now vs might have agreed to in March, is this notion that businesses and the economy in the will be better off with shutdowns, which was based on the premise that shutdowns would enable essentially eradication followed by a return to full or close to full normality.
It doesn't get worse than being mandated to close, unless being mandated to close comes with other benefits - right? That's the part of the equation that you're excluding. I'm not saying that would change the outcome but if you're not accounting for it at all, it makes it impossible to judge the full picture, surely.

To me there's an argument to shut down certain sectors that a) are already unprofitable, on course for mass bankruptcies, and are covering substantially more costs than they would be if shut down and b) are important factors in the transmission of the virus. If higher levels of transmission directly correlate with lower levels of consumer spending, then getting transmission under better control could lessen the economic pain on other sectors of the economy, while allowing the businesses that are shut down to return in more favourable conditions, and the overall economic costs could be lessened, offsetting additional government spending. There's a lot of variables there but ruling that out entirely seems a bit of a leap.

If that was the case everywhere we could start to speculate about immunity taking the edge off the second wave but, unfortunately, Lombardy seems to be getting slammed all over again.
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting that we can expect areas that were badly hit first time round to be exempted from future hits this time round. But the probability is that if you escaped the worst of it last time, you're more likely to be hit this time than your previously unfortunate neighbour. I think the pattern on that is so strong that we cant possibly put it down to just a quirk in the data.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
I know 3 people fairly close to me who all had Covid at the very start. All of them, 100% of the people I know who’ve had it, have long Covid. 2 are in their late 60’s so it’s less surprising that they’re still struggling with breathing but one is only a couple of years older than me, big lad, ex rugby player of 47 and I found out today he’s been readmitted to hospital with bad breathing problems. Really worrying.

People still belittling this and / or itching to get back to normal life probably haven’t seen the effects Covid can have on people and families up close. I still don’t want to catch it.
 

redshaw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
9,586
France with another 42k and 298 deaths.

Belgium with 16746 cases, equivalent to France UK having 90k+. Wonder if we'll see a lockdown there soon.
 

Woodzy

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
14,697
Location
Cardiff
I know 3 people fairly close to me who all had Covid at the very start. All of them, 100% of the people I know who’ve had it, have long Covid. 2 are in their late 60’s so it’s less surprising that they’re still struggling with breathing but one is only a couple of years older than me, big lad, ex rugby player of 47 and I found out today he’s been readmitted to hospital with bad breathing problems. Really worrying.

People still belittling this and / or itching to get back to normal life probably haven’t seen the effects Covid can have on people and families up close. I still don’t want to catch it.
As in they had it back in March? fecking hell, that is worrying.
 

Volumiza

The alright "V", B-Boy cypher cat
Joined
Jul 13, 2018
Messages
13,510
Location
Somewhere in the middle
As in they had it back in March? fecking hell, that is worrying.
All of them March and early April. My friends Mum and Stepdad, both late 60’s, were in intensive care for about 2 - 3 weeks and still struggle to walk up their own garden, they’re rarely seen out walking in the village like they used to.

My colleague, 47, more worryingly wasn’t admitted to hospital at the time, although he says he was very close to calling for an ambulance as his breathing was so bad, has now been hospitalised almost 6 months later with extreme fatigue and breathing difficulties.
 

Stanley Road

Renaissance Man
Joined
Feb 19, 2001
Messages
39,852
Location
Wrong Unstable Leadership
You need to have had a negative Covid test in the last three days to get into Cyprus, so am hoping the flight should be pretty safe, if we're all clean. Can't imagine it's that much more risky there than here- it's warm there so we'll eat outside etc...
Everybody needs a break and myself i particular cannot stand Autumn or winter. However, we recently had a lovely week long break in NL, 45 mins from home. We just think the risk is too high, have not even visited family in uk since mid December. My BIL in oz has not seen his sick dad for over a year. I personally believe if we just stop travelling and seeing other people things will improve for all.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
13,978
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
Why should Tesco be able to sell non-essential goods if shops selling non-essential goods have been forced to close? There was actually criticism in allowing them to sell clothes during the first lockdown.

And he isn’t “power mad” he’s trying to stop the very concerning growth of hospital admissions that’s currently happening here in Wales. Our field hospital is set to open next week due to the number of cases...we’re in October...if this keeps going at its current rate we are in big trouble in 2-3 weeks time. Unfortunately the guff about cases going up wouldn’t lead to an increase in admissions and deaths was just that...guff.
 

Dancfc

Full Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
7,392
Supports
Chelsea
Why should Tesco be able to sell non-essential goods if shops selling non-essential goods have been forced to close? There was actually criticism in allowing them to sell clothes during the first lockdown.

And he isn’t “power mad” he’s trying to stop the very concerning growth of hospital admissions that’s currently happening here in Wales. Our field hospital is set to open next week due to the number of cases...we’re in October...if this keeps going at its current rate we are in big trouble in 2-3 weeks time. Unfortunately the guff about cases going up wouldn’t lead to an increase in admissions and deaths was just that...guff.
Right, so the virus goes for someone if they look to get a kettle (that they might need because their last ones broke), a charger (that they may need as their other one is broke and they WFH so the ultimate consequence to not getting a charger will be to lose their job and ultimately their house), or a beer (that an alcoholic might need as going cold turkey from the bat will be too dangerous) but won't if they go and get Pasta?

And it's going to have a knock on effect aswell as it's going to cause yet more panic buying in England I imagine.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
13,978
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
Right, so the virus goes for someone if they look to get a kettle (that they might need because their last ones broke), a charger (that they may need as their other one is broke and they WFH so the ultimate consequence to not getting a charger will be to lose their job and ultimately their house), or a beer (that an alcoholic might need as going cold turkey from the bat will be too dangerous) but won't if they go and get Pasta?

And it's going to have a knock on effect aswell as it's going to cause yet more panic buying in England I imagine.
Ah yes...the whole the virus is smarter after 10pm argument. It’s all about risk management, to reduce contacts and to help get back to a consistent message to people that you should only be leaving your home for essential journeys. The categories of what is essential haven’t actually been announced yet but the sale of alcohol isn’t being banned...and as I’m sure you’re well aware you can still get things from that rarely used thing: the internet.

As for the latter point it possibly leading to the panic buying of kettles in England is the least of our fecking worries.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,874
Location
Cheshire
Why should Tesco be able to sell non-essential goods if shops selling non-essential goods have been forced to close? There was actually criticism in allowing them to sell clothes during the first lockdown.
It is a bit absurd really and he's setting a bit of a sticky precedent, does the first minster plan to block e-commerce companies who aren't selling essential goods? Trying to put a window dressing of support to closing businesses, by restricting what businesses that are open can sell isn't pandemic management and if anything restricts consumer choice, certainly for those communities that don't have coverage of internet or delivery services.

And he isn’t “power mad” he’s trying to stop the very concerning growth of hospital admissions that’s currently happening here in Wales. Our field hospital is set to open next week due to the number of cases...we’re in October...if this keeps going at its current rate we are in big trouble in 2-3 weeks time. Unfortunately the guff about cases going up wouldn’t lead to an increase in admissions and deaths was just that...guff.
It's a bit heavy handed from the Welsh first minister, his logic doesn't make sense when he still has ferry traffic coming over from Ireland.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,228
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
Everybody needs a break and myself i particular cannot stand Autumn or winter. However, we recently had a lovely week long break in NL, 45 mins from home. We just think the risk is too high, have not even visited family in uk since mid December. My BIL in oz has not seen his sick dad for over a year. I personally believe if we just stop travelling and seeing other people things will improve for all.
People travelling probably doesn't help tbf, but we're following the rules and will be tested. Holidays in England are shite and a rip off. NL sounds far better.

Appreciate it sucks for a lot of families and it has affected mine too. Everyone has to make a call on how they play it I guess.
And what if you get stuck there? What If either of you need hospitalised? I hope you have extra “what if” funds set aside. I think you’re mad
We have Ehic cards and medical insurance. If we have to shell out for a flight or something like that it's our own fault.
If the UK puts Cyprus on the red list they continue flights anyway. Plus we can only go if we test negative. Holidays are as much about who is willing to fork out for the covid test now tbh.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
It is a bit absurd really and he's setting a bit of a sticky precedent, does the first minster plan to block e-commerce companies who aren't selling essential goods? Trying to put a window dressing of support to closing businesses, by restricting what businesses that are open can sell isn't pandemic management and if anything restricts consumer choice, certainly for those communities that don't have coverage of internet or delivery services.



It's a bit heavy handed from the Welsh first minister, his logic doesn't make sense when he still has ferry traffic coming over from Ireland.
He’s pretty open about his logic. It’s about fairness. With locally owned businesses forced to close on the basis they’re not selling anything essential it doesn’t look good if the multinationals can increase their already substantial profits selling similar goods. The ferry traffic bears no relevance to this decision.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
13,978
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
It is a bit absurd really and he's setting a bit of a sticky precedent, does the first minster plan to block e-commerce companies who aren't selling essential goods? Trying to put a window dressing of support to closing businesses, by restricting what businesses that are open can sell isn't pandemic management and if anything restricts consumer choice, certainly for those communities that don't have coverage of internet or delivery services.



It's a bit heavy handed from the Welsh first minister, his logic doesn't make sense when he still has ferry traffic coming over from Ireland.
No. Of course he doesn’t plan to stop the online sale of non-essential goods. That doesn’t involve going to a shop and coming into contact with people does it? It’s pretty basic really. You should only leave your home for an essential journey. That’s the message. Simple. The same message that worked in March.

He’s looked at the data and realised we have 65% of the admissions we had AT THE PEAK during the first wave....a peak that happened 4 weeks AFTER a lockdown. We’ve locked down today. Anyone looking at that data would realise we’re in a shit sandwich. People not being able to buy a kettle at Tesco for 17 days isn’t really that much of an issue to be perfectly honest.

As for the England thing it is fecking ludicrous that someone from a tier 3 high risk area in England is able to travel to North Wales for a holiday whilst someone from low risk West Wales is legally not able to do so. And I’d imagine numbers travelling daily from Ireland are considerably less than from England. I joked on here back in August that our numbers were looking great and if we could only block the English border they’d stay that way...seems we’ve now decided to attempt that if we drive cases down again. It isn’t really feasible legally or in practice but looking at the utter shit show in England where economically crippling tier 3s are announced with no financial support and no end in sight as the CMO at the same announcement admits the restrictions won’t drive cases down then I can’t say I really blame him.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,874
Location
Cheshire
He’s pretty open about his logic. It’s about fairness. With locally owned businesses forced to close on the basis they’re not selling anything essential it doesn’t look good if the multinationals can increase their already substantial profits selling similar goods.
I know he's open about his logic, I'm saying it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If you're a small business owner and you're forced to close, you're more bothered about your own business and trade rather than whether a supermarket can sell a similar product, hence why it's nothing more than a window dressing. Wales is now in the position whereby the first minister identified that alcohol is more essential than clothes, and bedding (seasonal purchases) in physical retailers.

Consumer behaviour and demand on those products in the marketplace doesn't pent up, it just moves to a different retailer. Which in most cases will be in Amazon in this case - a multinational increasing their substantial profits selling similar goods.

The ferry traffic bears no relevance to this decision.
It does if he's making the case of wanting to retain a tight border and to stop cases coming into Wales.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,874
Location
Cheshire
No. Of course he doesn’t plan to stop the online sale of non-essential goods. That doesn’t involve going to a shop and coming into contact with people does it? It’s pretty basic really. You should only leave your home for an essential journey. That’s the message. Simple. The same message that worked in March.
Going by that logic, what difference does it make then if someone is in Tesco buying eggs or bread, and then wanting to purchase clothing or an item deemed as non-essential? I agree with the point of reducing contact, but if you're already in the store it makes no difference to the transmission rate on what someone purchases, which is my point about that it is purely window dressing. Consumers are impacted.

He’s looked at the data and realised we have 65% of the admissions we had AT THE PEAK during the first wave....a peak that happened 4 weeks AFTER a lockdown. We’ve locked down today. Anyone looking at that data would realise we’re in a shit sandwich. People not being able to buy a kettle at Tesco for 17 days isn’t really that much of an issue to be perfectly honest.
I've no issues with his fire break, however to deem what is essential products and non-essential products in a shop is a bit difficult. I don't see alcohol as an essential purchase, but an alcoholic in Wales might have a different opinion. Someone with no hot water access, might find that a kettle is an essential item. My point is that the Welsh first minister is not the person to be telling people what is essential or not in a store. The type of store that is open or closed is absolutely his call to make, and should be made with the data to reduce contact.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,253
Going by that logic, what difference does it make then if someone is in Tesco buying eggs or bread, and then wanting to purchase clothing or an item deemed as non-essential? I agree with the point of reducing contact, but if you're already in the store it makes no difference to the transmission rate on what someone purchases, which is my point about that it is purely window dressing. Consumers are impacted.
While I wouldn’t particularly agree with the stance, it’s probably to discourage people from going when they don’t need to. I’ve no doubt there are people who just want somewhere to go. Being able to go and buy stuff gives them that excuse to leave the house that they’re less likely to do for just food.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
13,978
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
Going by that logic, what difference does it make then if someone is in Tesco buying eggs or bread, and then wanting to purchase clothing or an item deemed as non-essential? I agree with the point of reducing contact, but if you're already in the store it makes no difference to the transmission rate on what someone purchases, which is my point about that it is purely window dressing. Consumers are impacted.



I've no issues with his fire break, however to deem what is essential products and non-essential products in a shop is a bit difficult. I don't see alcohol as an essential purchase, but an alcoholic in Wales might have a different opinion. Someone with no hot water access, might find that a kettle is an essential item. My point is that the Welsh first minister is not the person to be telling people what is essential or not in a store. The type of store that is open or closed is absolutely his call to make, and should be made with the data to reduce contact.
It’s not just that logic - it’s two completely independent bits of logic... 1) Online is allowed because you aren’t leaving your home coming into contact with people and 2) Why should someone be allowed to Travel to Tesco and buy clothes but not a clothes shop? That puts clothes shops at a disadvantage. What if it was a superstore where their clothes section is bigger than most small clothes shops? People who want to go clothes shopping may just pop there instead defeating the whole purpose of non-essential journeys. Maybe they fancy a trip out to go and browse the games section? Or the Electronics aisle? None of that is essential.

I don’t really get why you think it’s fine for the first minister to decide what essential and non-essential goods are when closing stores but not in stores themselves...and in the unlikely event your kettle breaks (It’s entirely possible kettles aren’t banned btw...I’d say they are essential but let’s just go with the Daily Mail which was wrong about alcohol being banned...) during the 17 day lockdown you can buy another online. As I’ve said twice now - it’s to do with the messaging. Only leave your home to go to work if you can’t work from home or buy essential goods. The end.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,874
Location
Cheshire
It’s not just that logic - it’s two completely independent bits of logic... 1) Online is allowed because you aren’t leaving your home coming into contact with people and 2) Why should someone be allowed to Travel to Tesco and buy clothes but not a clothes shop? That puts clothes shops at a disadvantage.
They really aren't independent, they're instrictly linked. Mark Drakeford has stopped non-essentially item sales in supermarket, in his words "to level the playing field", surely by that logic he would limit e-commerce as well. However he hasn't. There's also an assumption that everyone is online and has access to shopping that way, there's still 11% of Wales that doesn't have access to the internet. Back to the point I made earlier, demand in those types of items doesn't get pent-up, it just moves to another retailer and bought elsewhere, so doing this to level the playing field is just a token gesture by Drakeford to appease those stores he's closing, and those shops that are currently closed aren't going to see a surge of business because he's stopped supermarkets selling clothes.

What if it was a superstore where their clothes section is bigger than most small clothes shops? People who want to go clothes shopping may just pop there instead defeating the whole purpose of non-essential journeys. Maybe they fancy a trip out to go and browse the games section? Or the Electronics aisle? None of that is essential.
It may not be essential in your eyes, but to some it could be, which is why I couldn't sit there and say what is essential in a supermarket or isn't, as we have a broad spectrum of peoples needs to address. On the point of supermarket clothing though, it's an essential to those in society who need access to affordable clothing, which is why I don't understand Drakeford's logic here.

I don’t really get why you think it’s fine for the first minister to decide what essential and non-essential goods are when closing stores but not in stores themselves...and in the unlikely event your kettle breaks (It’s entirely possible kettles aren’t banned btw...I’d say they are essential but let’s just go with the Daily Mail which was wrong about alcohol being banned...) during the 17 day lockdown you can buy another online. As I’ve said twice now - it’s to do with the messaging. Only leave your home to go to work if you can’t work from home or buy essential goods. The end.
I think it's fine for him to decide on sectors and stores for opening because there is a broad recognition that the motivation for doing so is to control infection rates. What he's doing now is telling stores that are open what elements of their business he thinks is acceptable to trade on in order to protect others businesses, which is going far beyond what the purpose of a his fire break is intended to do. Kettle's are deemed as non-essential by the way, its classed as homeware. He's also stopped the sales of books within supermarkets also.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
13,978
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
They really aren't independent, they're instrictly linked. Mark Drakeford has stopped non-essentially item sales in supermarket, in his words "to level the playing field", surely by that logic he would limit e-commerce as well. However he hasn't. There's also an assumption that everyone is online and has access to shopping that way, there's still 11% of Wales that doesn't have access to the internet. Back to the point I made earlier, demand in those types of items doesn't get pent-up, it just moves to another retailer and bought elsewhere, so doing this to level the playing field is just a token gesture by Drakeford to appease those stores he's closing, and those shops that are currently closed aren't going to see a surge of business because he's stopped supermarkets selling clothes.



It may not be essential in your eyes, but to some it could be, which is why I couldn't sit there and say what is essential in a supermarket or isn't, as we have a broad spectrum of peoples needs to address. On the point of supermarket clothing though, it's an essential to those in society who need access to affordable clothing, which is why I don't understand Drakeford's logic here.



I think it's fine for him to decide on sectors and stores for opening because there is a broad recognition that the motivation for doing so is to control infection rates. What he's doing now is telling stores that are open what elements of their business he thinks is acceptable to trade on in order to protect others businesses, which is going far beyond what the purpose of a his fire break is intended to do. Kettle's are deemed as non-essential by the way, its classed as homeware. He's also stopped the sales of books within supermarkets also.
We’re going around in circles here. They are two separate entities. Online has nothing do with it. It’s irrelevant to this discussion. Online has been deemed safe. It stays as is. There is no COVID justification to restrict online goods. Going to shops carries a transmission risk. In order to minimise that transmission risk non-essential goods have been banned. This is to reduce the numbers going to shops and the time spent in shops. Those same non-essential goods being sold in Tesco or in Argos is irrelevant - they’re banned. You’re “it may not be essential to you but others it is” argument can be used against your very position. Why close anything then? Ultimately someone will deem it essential.

“Affordable clothing is essential to some people” - Then why shut TK Max? Or Primark? Also...and I feel this is key...it is seventeen days!!!! This isn’t a year. Who hasn’t got enough clothes to last 17 days? And if they haven’t they’ve had a week to buy clothes to last 17 days. Or they can buy clothes online during the next 17 days. It isn’t hard. Nobody needs to read a book in the next 17 days. It’s not essential. Or watch a movie. Or buy a TV. See what I’m saying? I feel it’s impossible to stress this enough...it’s 17 days.

Ultimately I’m basically just tired of everyone trying to find contradictions in everything. There will always be flaws and logical fallacies in such binary rules. If Tesco was allowed to sell clothes you just know some clever twat would be saying “ooh look how clever this virus is...it knows when I’m buying a jumper at Gap but not at Tesco”. It’s tiring. Unless you have to leave for work or for essential goods stay at home. Ultimately that’s the spirit of the lockdown. It really isn’t difficult.
 

F-Red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
10,874
Location
Cheshire
Ultimately I’m basically just tired of everyone trying to find contradictions in everything. There will always be flaws and logical fallacies in such binary rules. If Tesco was allowed to sell clothes you just know some clever twat would be saying “ooh look how clever this virus is...it knows when I’m buying a jumper at Gap but not at Tesco”. It’s tiring. Unless you have to leave for work or for essential goods stay at home. Ultimately that’s the spirit of the lockdown. It really isn’t difficult.
This image sums it up perfectly for me in terms of the perceived society priorities in Wales:

 

The Cat

Will drink milk from your hands
Joined
May 18, 2017
Messages
12,111
Location
Feet up at home.
I've seen mates of mine practically crying on Facebook about not being able to buy shit like toasters from a Supermarket - what do I do they say when mine brakes?

1) Use the grill
2) Order from Amazon/Argos whatever
3) Have some cereal

It's for 2 fecking weeks - it really isn't difficult to live without buying a toaster from Tesco
 

V.O.

Last Man Standing finalist 2019/20
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
7,847
What does the sign say?
Just something along the lines of "Due to government guidelines, we're unable to sell items not deemed essential. Thanks for your understanding."

If that picture is from anywhere east of Llandudno, it's bound to be a Google Translate job anyway. :lol:
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,317
I've seen mates of mine practically crying on Facebook about not being able to buy shit like toasters from a Supermarket - what do I do they say when mine brakes?

1) Use the grill
2) Order from Amazon/Argos whatever
3) Have some cereal

It's for 2 fecking weeks - it really isn't difficult to live without buying a toaster from Tesco
Does anyone actually buy anything from those aisles that have household/kitchen stuff? I don’t even walk down them. Actually, I haven’t been in a supermarket since full lock down, as I’ve been using click and collects. I don’t really know why anyone with a car is bothering to go into a supermarket.
 

Penna

Kind Moderator (with a bit of a mean streak)
Staff
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
49,661
Location
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
@Mickeza, I think you summed it all up very well. Browsing clothes and book aisles just invites more people to hang around in the shop. When you pick up a box of teabags you don't stand there looking at it for 5 minutes.

I think it's completely fair for the large shops to have the same restrictions as those which only sell clothes or books. The strategy and layout of superstores is to encourage impulse buying, so that if you do come in to buy some milk you'll maybe pick up something you didn't intend to buy as you walk to the tills. A significant number of people consider browsing in shops to be a leisure activity at the weekend.

For the vast majority of people, online shopping is a part of life (it kept us going in the first Italian lockdown) and although we hate to see Bezos getting another billion dollars, it's not going away now and has been a lifeline for a lot of people who are at risk.