calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Amazing that some would want to drive a car over a bridge only 25% completed.You give it to the people and watch a new variant grow. This thing hasn’t gone away
Amazing that some would want to drive a car over a bridge only 25% completed.You give it to the people and watch a new variant grow. This thing hasn’t gone away
Whilst I agree that this government has been and continues to be a shambles, we are not going to agree on throwing it back into the hands of the public either. You can’t just open up everything all together and hope it’s ok. There has to be a measured staggered approach or you put the last years sacrifice at riskI look at the shitshow in the UK and personally can't see how it would or could have been any worse, especially when looking at other countries and regions with less measures but more success (difficult to be any worse).
Hundreds of billions spent, hundreds of billions more stifled, businesses ruined, liberties stomped all over and still one of the worst death rates in the world (before even talking about the physical and mental health epidemic, the educational catastrophe and numerous other issues that we'll be dealing with for decades).
My "solution" is allow people to make their own risk assessment, especially now that so many have been vaccinated. If you're a 90 year old diabetic who refuses the vaccine I very much doubt you'll be going to a night club; and if you do you're consenting to that risk. A 20 year old with no conditions is likely to make a different judgment.
We're able to make our own risk assessments in pretty much every other facet of our lives. In what jobs we do, in where or if we go abroad, in our recreational activities, in deciding whether to seek medical treatment, who are friends are, whether to smoke, whether to drink, in where and how we get around; whether to walk, drive, cycle, skateboard or E-scoot.
Especially at this point in the pandemic I can see no rational argument for government to keep abjectly failing at attempting to limit people's abilities to put themselves at risk (at significant cost).
I know.Amazing that some would want to drive a car over a bridge only 25% completed.
The same people would then blame the governmental agency involved in building the bridge for its negligence, even though the agency had barriers up in place to prevent such idiocy.I know.
The same people would then blame the governmental agency involved in building the bridge for its negligence, even though the agency had barriers up in place to prevent such idiocy.
Given the death toll I can't see how the last year's sacrifices have been anything but history's most exorbitantly costly exercise in futility.Whilst I agree that this government has been and continues to be a shambles, we are not going to agree on throwing it back into the hands of the public either. You can’t just open up everything all together and hope it’s ok. There has to be a measured staggered approach or you put the last years sacrifice at risk
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Glad you approve!Wow. Just wow.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The flaw in your plan is that they arent just putting themselves at risk, they are then potentially spreading the virus after contracting it, in the supermarket, petrol station, etc places slightly more necessary than a nightclub or pub.I look at the shitshow in the UK and personally can't see how it would or could have been any worse, especially when looking at other countries and regions with less measures but more success (difficult to be any worse).
Hundreds of billions spent, hundreds of billions more stifled, businesses ruined, liberties stomped all over and still one of the worst death rates in the world (before even talking about the physical and mental health epidemic, the educational catastrophe and numerous other issues that we'll be dealing with for decades).
My "solution" is allow people to make their own risk assessment, especially now that so many have been vaccinated. If you're a 90 year old diabetic who refuses the vaccine I very much doubt you'll be going to a night club; and if you do you're consenting to that risk. A 20 year old with no conditions is likely to make a different judgment.
We're able to make our own risk assessments in pretty much every other facet of our lives. In what jobs we do, in where or if we go abroad, in our recreational activities, in deciding whether to seek medical treatment, who are friends are, whether to smoke, whether to drink, in where and how we get around; whether to walk, drive, cycle, skateboard or E-scoot.
Especially at this point in the pandemic I can see no rational argument for government to keep abjectly failing at attempting to limit people's abilities to put themselves at risk (at significant cost).
isn't nationalisation popular amongst voters across the political spectrumI wouldn't take that Hartlepool poll seriously as it seems they've asked people from the local communist party.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
They're spreading the virus to other people who've made their own risk assessments and have acted accordingly. People who've decided to go to the supermarket rather than have produce delivered. People that have gone inside a petrol station rather than used the outdoor flap.The flaw in your plan is that they arent just putting themselves at risk, they are then potentially spreading the virus after contracting it, in the supermarket, petrol station, etc places slightly more necessary than a nightclub or pub.
You misinterpreted. No worries, though.Glad you approve!
Other ideas after ending of lockdown should include;
When everyone returns to work at the beginning of every shift they all assemble outside (whatever the weather) to;
*sing the company song
*sing a version of; "wash your hands, maintain your space and protect the NHS"
and then end
*with the National Anthem and/ or 'God for Boris, England and St. George'
NB Penalty for non-compliance with any of the above is repeated (enforced) visits to Barnard Castle dressed in sack clothe and ashes until restriction is lifted by Dominic Cummings intervention
It polls well but when it comes to actually voting on it then it's another matter.isn't nationalisation popular amongst voters across the political spectrum
Alternatively we can appease the idiots who don't understand the science and reasons behind a passport and;Glad you approve!
Other ideas after ending of lockdown should include;
When everyone returns to work at the beginning of every shift they all assemble outside (whatever the weather) to;
*sing the company song
*sing a version of; "wash your hands, maintain your space and protect the NHS"
and then end
*with the National Anthem and/ or 'God for Boris, England and St. George'
NB Penalty for non-compliance with any of the above is repeated (enforced) visits to Barnard Castle dressed in sack clothe and ashes until restriction is lifted by Dominic Cummings intervention
I think you're missing out the other two groups affected by this; NHS staff and patients who can't get appointments due to these self assessors becoming infected.They're spreading the virus to other people who've made their own risk assessments and have acted accordingly. People who've decided to go to the supermarket rather than have produce delivered. People that have gone inside a petrol station rather than used the outdoor flap.
With the vast majority of the vulnerable vaccinated I don't see how this is any different to driving. The same argument about (non-vulnerable or vaccinated) people contracting Covid at a petrol station is true of potentially being side swiped and killed by an idiot driving out of said petrol station.
We're likely to have thousand of deaths every year for years to come (potentially forever). Likewise we're going to be at risk of a vaccine resistant strain emerging for years, potentially forever. An argument not to open up now is an argument for a lifetime of restrictions.
Could be worse. You could have this melt as your local MPTotally random thought, but it must be shit to have a minister/shadow minister as your MP. Doubt they give a flying feck about constituency issues, especially if its a safe seat.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
NHS staff are vaccinated and those self assessors would presumably either be a) also vaccinated; or b) under 50 with no underlying conditions (meaning risk of hospitalisation is minute).I think you're missing out the other two groups affected by this; NHS staff and patients who can't get appointments due to these self assessors becoming infected.
I'm talking about the strain on services, not the risk of infection though.NHS staff are vaccinated and those self assessors would presumably either be a) also vaccinated; or b) under 50 with no underlying conditions (meaning risk of hospitalisation is minute).
How will services be strained if the only people getting infected are either already vaccinated and ergo have a minute change of hospitalisation or are under 50 (hell even under 60) with no underlying conditions and ergo have a minute chance of hospitalisation.I'm talking about the strain on services, not the risk of infection though.
Not yet... but wait until the Tories have been in power for the next two decades.NB Penalty for non-compliance is for absolutely feck all to happen because as shit as this country is we're not a totalitarian regime.
Well, there goes my chance of a decent night's sleep.Not yet... but wait until the Tories have been in power for the next two decades.
The current so called 'two party system' will become (is becoming already) a one party system with that one party always finishing 'first past the post' because they carry the post with them and plant it down as and when they feel like it.
Yes the 'stuff' of nightmares!Well, there goes my chance of a decent night's sleep.
Spot on.Not yet... but wait until the Tories have been in power for the next two decades.
The current so called 'two party system' will become (is becoming already) a one party system with that one party always finishing 'first past the post' because they carry the post with them and plant it down as and when they feel like it.
So the longest any party has maintained a majority under the FPTP system since 1800 is 19 years (the tory party from 1807 to 1826)... 5 electionsNot yet... but wait until the Tories have been in power for the next two decades.
The current so called 'two party system' will become (is becoming already) a one party system with that one party always finishing 'first past the post' because they carry the post with them and plant it down as and when they feel like it.
I agree, it seems unlikely but the current political situation in Scotland is a real problem for labour and may impact it.So the longest any party has maintained a majority under the FPTP system since 1800 is 19 years (the tory party from 1807 to 1826)... 5 elections
the only other time a party has won a majority in 4 elections in a row was 1979 to 1992 (thatcher and major)
Currently the conservatives have won a majority in the last erm 1 elections so I think its a little early to assume its ging to be 5 straight conservative majorities and 20+ years of uninterpreted majorities
I would like to see the move to PR but its not going to happen unless we get a hung parliament and personally i think thats much more likely over the next 20 years than 4 straight conservative majorities
from a purely political power basis its shocking the conservatives have not taken the approach of supporting indy ref 2 ... I do wonder if secretly they wouldnt mind it happening and wouldn't campaign all that hard to stop it?I agree, it seems unlikely but the current political situation in Scotland is a real problem for labour and may impact it.
If either Scotland stays, but the SNP remain a force or Scotland get independence I can't see how Labour makes up all those seats in England personally. They were getting 40 plus seats per year up to 2010 which is now down to 1 and they have to make those up in the rest of the UK somehow.
Of the last 125 years, the Tories have been in power for 80 years.So the longest any party has maintained a majority under the FPTP system since 1800 is 19 years (the tory party from 1807 to 1826)... 5 elections
the only other time a party has won a majority in 4 elections in a row was 1979 to 1992 (thatcher and major)
Currently the conservatives have won a majority in the last erm 1 elections so I think its a little early to assume its ging to be 5 straight conservative majorities and 20+ years of uninterpreted majorities
I would like to see the move to PR but its not going to happen unless we get a hung parliament and personally i think thats much more likely over the next 20 years than 4 straight conservative majorities
Like everything, there is good and bad about PR (which I cannot see happening any time soon).So the longest any party has maintained a majority under the FPTP system since 1800 is 19 years (the tory party from 1807 to 1826)... 5 elections
the only other time a party has won a majority in 4 elections in a row was 1979 to 1992 (thatcher and major)
Currently the conservatives have won a majority in the last erm 1 elections so I think its a little early to assume its ging to be 5 straight conservative majorities and 20+ years of uninterpreted majorities
I would like to see the move to PR but its not going to happen unless we get a hung parliament and personally i think thats much more likely over the next 20 years than 4 straight conservative majorities
The first past the post system is stacked against the opposition. Also it is not representative, didn't UKIP get 1 million votes but zero seats quite recently? As much as I disagree write their party, those voters not being represented what causes disenfranchised and angry population. This is partly why the Brexit referendum, for example, was such a protest vote.Like everything, there is good and bad about PR (which I cannot see happening any time soon).
Yes it should be fairer, particularly for the smaller parties like the Greens for example.
But for generations, we have been accustomed to knowing who have won and who the next government is by the next day.
It is up to the opposition to change the voters minds.
And while I would love the Labour party to become the next government, I am becoming less optimistic by the day.
If labour had joined the "remain alliance" we would have had that a couple of elections ago - looking back perhaps a shame we didnt.The first past the post system is stacked against the opposition. Also it is not representative, didn't UKIP get 1 million votes but zero seats quite recently? As much as I disagree write their party, those voters not being represented what causes disenfranchised and angry population. This is partly why the Brexit referendum, for example, was such a protest vote.
@sun_tzu
On another note, every non Tory party and the population as a whole would benefit from PR. It is more representative.
All parties should band together, so in each constituency, have only one non Tory MP, standing against the a Tories on the sole platform of voting in PR then calling another election.
Yes, under normal circumstances I would agree but there are two major factors in play right now;next 20 years than 4 straight conservative majorities