Quote Originally Posted by swaledale View Post
Interesting rA, that you are so ready to dismiss an alternative point of view as "*******s" when the scientists with their grossly exaggerated models are considered OK? Lets face it not even the scientists agree and are not always right either.

I have to say that I am still of the view that the harm done by lockdowns, in terms of economic loss, mental health and delays to other health treatments is not far short of the death toll from Coronavirus, indeed over the longer term it may be higher. Putting the whole country into lockdown, rather than targeted local lockdowns of high infection areas with tracing and isolation of those infected as say China and South Korea have done, seems more effective with less negative results for society as a whole.

Its so easy if your retired on a pension sat safely at home to agree with the lockdown approach, not so easy if your self employed and getting **** all from the government.

But also in freedom of speech, is not incumbent to allow others with a point of view to express that point of view? I agree that where there is deliberate inciting of violence, revolt or discriminatory views expressed then some form of censorship is appropriate, but I'm vary wary of stopping expression simply because some do not agree with the views being expressed.
**** me, Im agreeing with Swal again! The trouble is that pro Tory pro Johnson advocates such as rA are all too prepared to believe what the government advice is when it doesnt represent an inconvenience to them personally. And before you get all angst ridden rA, that is called sarcasm