Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If you really believe that all 7.6 billion who live on the planet can adhere strictly to the governments' 'rules', and that this will cause the virus to be eradicated, then you are a lost cause.


If you are in the comfortable position of having a pension or a guaranteed salary, a garden, no dependents (of any age), ample space in your house, a study to work in, a good internet connection, and a good support bubble....well lucky you. But you are the minority. The rest of the world really is doing their best to keep their sanity.

This thread started with a complaint about people (adults and kids) who were in playgrounds, which doesn?t break any rules. You don?t live their life. You don?t know their stress or their home.

Follow the rules, add some extra for yourself if you like, but don?t berate others.

TreacleRabbit Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This thread started with a complaint about people

> (adults and kids) who were in playgrounds, which

> doesn?t break any rules. You don?t live their

> life. You don?t know their stress or their home.

> Follow the rules, add some extra for yourself if

> you like, but don?t berate others.


Well said TR

But arranging to meet others is currently not allowed. And it is happening (I know because I am in the WhatsApp groups).


This leaves me in a bit of a dilemma. I don't want to lose friends (or more to the point, lose my kids friends) by lecturing to them... but also, I don't think it's the right thing to do. All I can do is say "sorry, we're being careful right now, hopefully see you in the Spring". Anonymously moaning on the internet is cowardly and lame, I know... yet here I am...

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> But for most young people (under 40)

> the disease will be mild if it's even noticeable -

> at worst like a relatively mild and short lived

> dose of flu.


Totally disagree. I'm 33 without any underlying conditions and ended up in hospital because of it. There were people in their 20s without underlying conditions on my ward in Kings. Thankfully I'm on the mend now but this idea that it doesn't seriously affect those under 40 is a dangerous myth

Clearly your name is legion - I clearly said for most people under 40 - not for all people under 40. I am well aware that a comparative few under 40 will suffer severe illness and indeed may die - or develop Long Covid. But, and in general, those under 40 will, in the main, either be asymptomatic or have what is a relatively mild and short lived illness. Some, clearly, won't be so lucky. But the odds are very much in favour of under 40s carrying a 'get out of jail free' card, when others (and I am over 70) don't.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The main problem Post Offices have, IMO, is they are generally a sub optimal experience and don't really deliver services in the way people  want or need these days. I always dread having to use one as you know it will be time consuming and annoying. 
    • If you want to look for blame, look at McKinsey's. It was their model of separating cost and profit centres which started the restructuring of the Post Office - once BT was fully separated off - into Lines of Business - Parcels; Mail Delivery and Retail outlets (set aside the whole Giro Bank nonsense). Once you separate out these lines of business and make them 'stand-alone' you immediately make them vulnerable to sell off and additionally, by separating the 'businesses' make each stand or fall on their own, without cross subsidy. The Post Office took on banking and some government outsourced activity - selling licences and passports etc. as  additional revenue streams to cross subsidize the postal services, and to offer an incentive to outsourced sub post offices. As a single 'comms' delivery business the Post Office (which included the telcom business) made financial sense. Start separating elements off and it doesn't. Getting rid of 'non profitable' activity makes sense in a purely commercial environment, but not in one which is also about overall national benefit - where having an affordable and effective communications (in its largest sense) business is to the national benefit. Of course, the fact the the Government treated the highly profitable telecoms business as a cash cow (BT had a negative PSBR - public sector borrowing requirement - which meant far from the public purse funding investment in infrastructure BT had to lend the government money every year from it's operating surplus) meant that services were terrible and the improvement following privatisation was simply the effect of BT now being able to invest in infrastructure - which is why (partly) its service quality soared in the years following privatisation. I was working for BT through this period and saw what was happening there.
    • But didn't that separation begin with New Labour and Peter Mandelson?
    • I am not disputing that the Post Office remains publicly owned. But the Lib Dems’ decision to separate and privatise Royal Mail has fatally undermined the PO.  It is within the power of the Labour government to save what is left of the PO and the service it provides to the community, if they care enough; I suspect they do not.  However, the appalling postal service is a constant reminder of the Lib Dems’ duplicity on this matter. It is actions taken under the Lib Dem / Conservative coalition that have brought us to this point.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...