O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[Magpies1959]

Honest question, regardless of which political party is in power. Who thinks we should continue wearing masks, (when covid has worn itself out) to maybe prevent deaths from flu.

[BigFatPie]

BFP the evidence is readily available from stats given by the South African's. This Omicron variant is much milder than previous ones which is what you expect from a virus. There do seem to be people out there happy to revel in lockdowns and restrictions. Drakeford and Sturgeon to name but two.

Yes the evidence suggests its milder, but more contagious, I’ve posted some of the research myself.

That doesn’t mean you let people do what they like or trust ‘personal responsibility’ whatever that means on a night where people tend to drink a lot. As I said, we don’t want a large percentage of our health workers and teachers off work come January.

But you know as well as I do that Johnson isn’t making his decisions based on evidence, he’s making them based on what he thinks will keep him in a job.

[GEZMAN]

Really? What are the medical qualifications of those backbenchers? Has Steve Baker got himself a phd in epidemiology but not told anyone?

The same Steve Baker who was the chief architect of global financing and asset service platforms at Lehman Brothers, 2006–2008, the same Lehman Brothers whose bankruptcy in 2008 is thought to have played a major role in the unfolding of the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

Ideal CV to provide 'expert' advice.......................

[Magpies1959]

BFP I am of the thinking, if Mr Johnson said Notts County play their home games at Meadow Lane you would beg to differ 🤣

[jackal2]

The idea that you can only look after one of the economy or people’s health is a myth.

I couldn't agree more, which is why it makes sense to strongly advise people to take sensible precautions advised by the medical experts, including wearing masks and limiting their social interactions and travelling less than they would normally, but not to legally impose restrictions that cripple businesses only just recovering from the previous lockdown. The original lockdown restrictions were more justifiable because we didn't have the protection of vaccines at that point, but now we’re in a different place.

Yes the evidence suggests its milder, but more contagious, I’ve posted some of the research myself. That doesn’t mean you let people do what they like or trust ‘personal responsibility’.

I simply disagree. Yes, trusting people to exercise personal responsibility is a risk and not all will, but that’s the price of living in a free country as opposed to one where the Government imposes all sorts of restrictions. Right-wing and left-wing authoritarian governments and dictators will always claim that the restrictions they impose are ‘in the public interest’ or ‘protecting the public’, but it doesn’t mean we should believe them or accept it happening here.

[jackal2]

Honest question, regardless of which political party is in power. Who thinks we should continue wearing masks, (when covid has worn itself out) to maybe prevent deaths from flu.

I've worn my mask on public transport and when moving about in particularly busy areas, and I must admit I've gone longer without a cold/cough than I've ever done, so anecdotally it may have benefitted me and I might continue to do so, on public transport at least, but it has to be a personal choice, not a legal requirement.

[magpie_mania]

I've worn my mask on public transport and when moving about in particularly busy areas, and I must admit I've gone longer without a cold/cough than I've ever done, so anecdotally it may have benefitted me and I might continue to do so, on public transport at least, but it has to be a personal choice, not a legal requirement.

Who benefits from masks - the wearers or others nearby? I too have not had a cough for longer than many years, but I think it's not just because I have worn a mask but because others have too.

Regarding Whitty etc., their role has been to advise from a medical point of view. The Govt then have to decide what to do based on their advice. It is clear I think that Boris has decided to take the route which will be best for him. I trust the scientists, I don't the PM.

[Elite_Pie]

I've worn my mask on public transport and when moving about in particularly busy areas, and I must admit I've gone longer without a cold/cough than I've ever done, so anecdotally it may have benefitted me and I might continue to do so, on public transport at least, but it has to be a personal choice, not a legal requirement.

Disagree. If it is proved masks that are effective against containing the virus (pick your own Googled 'proof' either way) then it has to be a legal requirement. I absolutely hate wearing the bloody things, but common sense tells me they can either do good or do nothing. I just don't see how they can have an adverse effect, so as annoying as they are we should take the safe option. I liken it to the wearing of seat belts and obeying speed limits when driving. Since both were made law the number of road fatalities has declined. Do you also think that wearing a seat belt and sticking to the speed limit should be a matter of personal choice?

[BigFatPie]

I couldn't agree more, which is why it makes sense to strongly advise people to take sensible precautions advised by the medical experts, including wearing masks and limiting their social interactions and travelling less than they would normally, but not to legally impose restrictions that cripple businesses only just recovering from the previous lockdown. The original lockdown restrictions were more justifiable because we didn't have the protection of vaccines at that point, but now we’re in a different place.



I simply disagree. Yes, trusting people to exercise personal responsibility is a risk and not all will, but that’s the price of living in a free country as opposed to one where the Government imposes all sorts of restrictions. Right-wing and left-wing authoritarian governments and dictators will always claim that the restrictions they impose are ‘in the public interest’ or ‘protecting the public’, but it doesn’t mean we should believe them or accept it happening here.

It’s nothing to do with dictators it’s a question of do I go to the pub on New Years Eve or not? If so how do I exercise ‘caution’? If lots of people decide to stay at home, who compensates businesses on the loss of trade on the busiest night of the year? What happens if already stretched health and education services have loads of people off work?

To the government, the big difference between advice and shutting places down is that if they do it compulsorily they have to pay out, which I think is probably what a low taxation ideologue like Sunak wants to avoid. Typically short term thinking.

[BigFatPie]

The same Steve Baker who was the chief architect of global financing and asset service platforms at Lehman Brothers, 2006–2008, the same Lehman Brothers whose bankruptcy in 2008 is thought to have played a major role in the unfolding of the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

Ideal CV to provide 'expert' advice.......................

Yep. Generally speaking, if you’re on the same side of an argument as that clown you are struggling.

[jackal2]

Disagree. If it is proved masks that are effective against containing the virus (pick your own Googled 'proof' either way) then it has to be a legal requirement. I absolutely hate wearing the bloody things, but common sense tells me they can either do good or do nothing. I just don't see how they can have an adverse effect, so as annoying as they are we should take the safe option. I liken it to the wearing of seat belts and obeying speed limits when driving. Since both were made law the number of road fatalities has declined. Do you also think that wearing a seat belt and sticking to the speed limit should be a matter of personal choice?

A mischievous question, but I think the benefits of wearing seat belts are far more comprehensively proven than the benefits of wearing masks, which are still a bone of considerable contention even amongst some medical experts. And I'm saying that as someone who chooses to wear mine in certain places, as I've stated above, so I'm not coming from a position of bias against masks.

I suspect there is far more consensus amongst the public about the law regarding seatbelts than some of the restrictions around Covid, including mask-wearing, and good laws are usually the ones that have broad public consent and thus willing compliance from most. Ultimately, if large numbers of otherwise law-abiding people decide a particular law is unfair or unnecessary and choose to disregard it, then it becomes difficult to police anyway. There was broad public consensus over the restrictions imposed during the first lockdown, but I think the public view now is far more nuanced, which is where advice rather than imposition becomes the best way forward.

Sometimes it goes the other way too, where the Government fails to create or change law despite a broad public consensus that it should. For instance, I'm in favour of assisted dying, as are three in four Britons apparently, but successive Governments have failed to reflect this by revisiting that area of law, despite multiple opportunities.

[jackal2]

It’s nothing to do with dictators it’s a question of do I go to the pub on New Years Eve or not? If so how do I exercise ‘caution’?

I'm saying the decision on whether to go to the pub should be your choice. You're saying you want it to be dictated to you by a Boris Johnson Government. It's a funny old world!

To the government, the big difference between advice and shutting places down is that if they do it compulsorily they have to pay out, which I think is probably what a low taxation ideologue like Sunak wants to avoid. Typically short term thinking.

Rishi Sunak hasn't been looking like a low tax ideologue so far during his Chancellorship. Granted, he's had little choice but to spend big given the circumstances of the first phase of the pandemic, but if he's now exercising caution with the public purse to avoid placing a massive tax burden on people for years to come, then that's not short-term thinking in my book.

[Elite_Pie]

A mischievous question, but I think the benefits of wearing seat belts are far more comprehensively proven than the benefits of wearing masks, which are still a bone of considerable contention even amongst some medical experts.

True, that's why I added "Google your own proof". I've never seen anything to say that masks help to spread the virus (although it's probably out there somewhere if you look hard enough!), so I think we should err on the side of caution until we get an answer.

Sometimes it goes the other way too, where the Government fails to create or change law despite a broad public consensus that it should. For instance, I'm in favour of assisted dying, as are three in four Britons apparently, but successive Governments have failed to reflect this by revisiting that area of law, despite multiple opportunities.

Couldn't agree more on that one. One of my biggest dreads is that the end of my time comes because of some illness where I have no quality of life, and what it would do to my family watching me suffer. If a new law came out giving me the option to allow me to end my life when I chose to, I would sign up in a heartbeat.

[Old_pie]

If a new law came out giving me the option to allow me to end my life when I chose to, I would sign up in a heartbeat.

I didn't think committing suicide was illegal. What are they going to do, fine you?

[Elite_Pie]

I didn't think committing suicide was illegal. What are they going to do, fine you?

Probably issue me with a warning about my future behaviour and offer me counselling.