O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

I'm pretty even-handed about stuff rA, BBC produce some real quality as I've said in the past, I'm just disappointed at their obsession with diversity as you know. The issue I raised about the BBC 'Doughnutting' BAME faces into every possible feature has now become endemic, and hasn't gone unnoticed by my friends 'the silent majority', broadly non-racist folk who are just ****ed off with the practise which is actually in breach of the BBC's charter

---

I find it strange that you get worked up about this! Firstly I've not noticed this, so some examples of what to me seems a very sweeping assertion would be helpful. Secondly how can one be "broadly non racist"? You are either are or your not! Of course there are varying degrees, but generally if BAME TV presenters or people on the screen pisses you off, I'd say that points in one direction.

Not sure why you think its an issue, I'm more concerned about how good a presenter is at what they do, not bothered whether they are BAME or not, but maybe I don't see it as an issue? Shouldn't all media try to reflect the mix of the society they are operating in?

I have noticed more obviously disabled presenters and that I applaud, the more representative of actual society we see on the media the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Where do you get the 55+ age group from?

---

Quite possibly from me Swale from one of my posts on the current situation in the Netherlands. Our government has been telling us for the past 3 or 4 weeks that a huge majority of new cases are U30s and the vast majority of hospitalisations are 55+.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

I find it strange that you get worked up about this! Firstly I've not noticed this, so some examples of what to me seems a very sweeping assertion would be helpful. Secondly how can one be "broadly non racist"? You are either are or your not! Of course there are varying degrees, but generally if BAME TV presenters or people on the screen pisses you off, I'd say that points in one direction.

Not sure why you think its an issue, I'm more concerned about how good a presenter is at what they do, not bothered whether they are BAME or not, but maybe I don't see it as an issue? Shouldn't all media try to reflect the mix of the society they are operating in?

I have noticed more obviously disabled presenters and that I applaud, the more representative of actual society we see on the media the better.

---

Prior to going into teaching, I was a senior IT Manager. I had run quite a few recruitment drives. Advertised vacancies to replace staff who had left. Read thousands of application letters and their accompanying CVs. I invited the best candidates, on paper, for an interview. I then chose the best candidate(s) to fill the vacancy(ies). I didn't give a rat's ass if they were male, female, Caucasian, BAME or whatever. I was purely interested in a) their suitability to perform the job to the levels I and the company required and b) whether they fit into the team. To help with that, part of the interview was conducted with members of the team present and taking an active part.

As a result we ended up with a broad spread of characters, introvert, extrovert, thinkers, doers............ and a spread of gender, colour etc.

If I'd ended up with a department of black, lesbian, catholic invalids I would be happy in the knowledge that I had hired the best available candidate at the time of hiring. I know for a fact that my gaffer wanted me to hire the best available. That was my job and that was what I did. I am actually amazed that others don't do the same.

After retiring from teaching I did 2 days a week for 2 years working at a friend's IT recruitment company vetting application letters, CVs, doing first interviews and running the best candidates past the client before deciding who would be invited for interview. Again, I was only interested in how good they were for the job in hand. The final decision was the client's but I gave them the best of the applicants to choose from. That approach saw us (a small company of 5 people) take some clients off large national and multinational agencies. We had the personal touch and the clients were happy with what we sent them. To cut down on staff, the larger companies vetted CVs by passing the CVs through software looking for keywords. Their agents had no IT background and couldn't understand the CVs if they tried. We were all IT professionals and we knew if someone was trying to pull the wool over our eyes. One time I had a CV that looked perfect for the job. I then studied it and the applicant was claiming to have used some products but could show no evidence of where he had learned how to use/code it. I invited him for a "1st interview". For 20 minutes he had the idea it was going well and I was "buying" his very well rehearsed backstory. I then asked a few hard but fair questions regarding where he'd had, for instance, the training for CICS and a couple of technical questions. He was stymied. If I'd sent him to the client, I am 99% certain they would have hired him and that would have damaged our reputation.

Why hire 2nd or 3rd best just because they fit a certain demographic? Best for the job has always been my mantra.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Where do you get the 55+ age group from? WHO and government guidance states over 70's but every medical expert I've heard says that whilst age is a factor, the state of ones health is the biggest denominator.

The official figures on death rates are as follows:

In age groups up to and including 60-69, fewer than 1 in 1,000 people have died from coronavirus.
Age 70-79, it’s 2 in every 1,000 people.
Age 80-89, it’s 7 in every 1,000 people.
Age 90 and over, it’s 18 people in every 1,000 people.
Males have a higher risk in every age group than females.

Thats pretty good odds IF one is in a reasonable state of health.

Of course to properly assess the risk one would also need to compare the risk of death from other causes, BUT its estimated that deaths from cancer alone due to delayed treatment etc. will run into tens of thousands over the next couple of years.

By the way the 75 year old was a woman and not sure why you'd say it was fascist? If we are killing thousands in order to save thousands isn't that also fascist?

If we have completely ****ed the economy and the lives of hundreds of thousands of people of people whats that then?

I made my first visit to London yesterday, tubes and trains eerily quiet, mask wearing compliance good, fewer people on the streets but not noticeably so.

Mad its far too early to say whether the virus has mutated to a weaker strain, no medical expert I've spoken to or heard speak has said that is the case, more likely that the only people exposed have much more resistance to it, due to health or perhaps having gained some immunity.

I'm intrigued rA as to what your approach would be IF we don't get a vaccine? Do we suspend normal life for 18 months or longer?

Also where do you get the idea that cost effectiveness isn't a measure in developing vaccines or other health treatments? That has always been the case and would be with Covid-19, after all if a vaccine isn't very effective but costs millions to make and not using it would not cost those millions then its likely not to be implemented.

---

Firstly, it makes no difference whether the person concerned was male or female, and I didn’t actually say she was ‘fascist’.
She may be very well intentioned or there may be circumstances we are unaware of which alter her perspective. Either way my suggestion was, if the same sentiments had been uttered by someone decades younger they could have been seen as ‘verging on the fascist’ via a kind of ‘Tomorrow belongs to me’ mentality.

It’s an unfortunate fact of life that, criminals apart, three groups within society are the least ‘cost effective’ and most expensive - the young, the old and the sick, but, imo, that doesn’t mean we should abandon concern for any of them.

There are times throughout history when different age groups suffer or benefit disproportionately. War is obviously the prime example when it is invariably young adult males who suffer the most but, at a much lower level, our generation could only dream of mortgage rates at the level they are for today’s thirty/forty somethings while my parents’ generation enjoyed savings rates that we, again, could only dream of. Luck of the draw really.

What do we do? Well, as you’ll probably agree, some joined up thought and proper leadership would make a nice change.
Where getting pupils back into school is concerned I’d like to see the provision of alternative buildings but of course nothing has been done about that throughout the ‘summer’ because the government appears to have gone awol and won’t wake up to the problem until September.
I’d like to see more thought from employers as regards accommodating the child care needs of employees which I understand is happening in Germany and I’d like to see a more ‘collective’ World response to the search for a vaccine rather than the sort of semi jingoistic competition which is currently going on and which may ultimately only result in even wealthier and more selfish drug companies.

Of course where we’ll agree and where MA’s call for ‘Revolution’ - in mind set at least - fits into all this, is that so long as 1% of the World’s population owns 50% of the World’s wealth then conditions for old and young alike (and probably all of us) are only likely to worsen in the short term as a result of this pandemic.

Put things in perspective

https://news.sky.com/video/thailand-...ities-12052503

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Put things in perspective

https://news.sky.com/video/thailand-...ities-12052503

---

Apparently, they've just quarantined all cars indefibitely ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadAmster

Apparently, they've just quarantined all cars indefibitely ;)

---

That would help I suppose lol

But the point is, a country gets all in a hissy fit over something, when worse is right under its nose. I don't know if you have been to Thailand Maddy? But they are desperate over there. They don't do furlough and most folks work for themselves with very little employee rights. They are desperate. A low COVID death rate, yet thousands die day to day from everyday travel.

The same sort of thing is happening here. We have basically shut down a country over a few thousand deaths. Which, lets be fair here, are maily in the pensioner/ill health bracket.
It has now been said, that 60 000 people will die from cancer, due to lack of treatment because of this lock down. I'm sure they are very grateful, that the old and infirm got priority. Harsh I know. But that's a fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

That would help I suppose lol

But the point is, a country gets all in a hissy fit over something, when worse is right under its nose. I don't know if you have been to Thailand Maddy? But they are desperate over there. They don't do furlough and most folks work for themselves with very little employee rights. They are desperate. A low COVID death rate, yet thousands die day to day from everyday travel.

The same sort of thing is happening here. We have basically shut down a country over a few thousand deaths. Which, lets be fair here, are maily in the pensioner/ill health bracket.
It has now been said, that 60 000 people will die from cancer, due to lack of treatment because of this lock down. I'm sure they are very grateful, that the old and infirm got priority. Harsh I know. But that's a fact.

---

Maybe, with hindsight, they should have had CV hospitals dealing exclusively with CV patients and others handling the usual day to day stuff of A&E, heart, lung, liver, brain, cancer etc treatment rather than "furlough" them in favour of CV treatments.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, much possessed by those who seek to criticise....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadAmster

Maybe, with hindsight, they should have had CV hospitals dealing exclusively with CV patients and others handling the usual day to day stuff of A&E, heart, lung, liver, brain, cancer etc treatment rather than "furlough" them in favour of CV treatments.

---

Possibly Maddy.
In hindsight, maybe anyone over 50 should have been furloughed and self isolated?
Introduce measures of masks/no crowds etc but work carries on?

Pensionsers homes etc, become off limits. With no vaccine, this has to run its course. The damage being done to the economy and current patients is going to dwarf the Kung Flu.