O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

[Andy_Faber]

Second time today you’ve referred to ‘rA’s underclasses’, GP. I merely pointed out, a while ago, that there is an ‘underclass’ and that they represent a group of people who may be ‘difficult to reach’ as far as vaccination is concerned.

you'll just keep stirring up argument with both those catchphrases rA, both Underclass and Difficult to reach are so nebulous as to be meaningless

[ramAnag]

you'll just keep stirring up argument with both those catchphrases rA, both Underclass and Difficult to reach are so nebulous as to be meaningless

Only to you, and the mischief maker in chief. Most on here know exactly what I mean. What would you call and describe them as...or do you just want to deny their existence?

[swaledale]

you'll just keep stirring up argument with both those catchphrases rA, both Underclass and Difficult to reach are so nebulous as to be meaningless

Thats a rather sweeping statement and reveals your lack of understanding as to social issues There is certainly an underclass in this country, indeed I suspect in any country, but I'll stick to the Uk as thats my experience.

By and large these are people who are economically and socially disadvantaged, depending upon ones point of view and indeed political leaning, their situation is either due to economic factors or behavioural factors. The Tories liked to call them "troubled families", I suspect its a bit of both, but if one is born into a family that is economically disadvantaged then the perpetuation of a lifestyle isn't unexpected.

Its very easy from a position of relative economic security such as you and I enjoy to assume that everyone has the same life chances, but that is actually not the case, if there is one thing that Covid has revealed is the stark inequality in access to education, health care, housing and jobs etc that exists and its not solely due to people's life choices.

I do remember your exclamation of disbelief when I mentioned the difficult to reach regarding vaccination. They exist, believe it or not there is a significant proportion of the population who for many reasons do not engage with what we would term mainstream society - these reasons include language, cultural, distrust of authority, poverty, lack of education, environment and so on.

I'm not entering into a debate as to why they are hard to reach, except to say that its not just immigrant communities, there are many examples of white (mainly poor) white communities which are equally hard to reach. I'm just saying they exist and in a crisis such as a pandemic, it is foolish to pretend they don't.

[Andy_Faber]

Thats a rather sweeping statement and reveals your lack of understanding as to social issues There is certainly an underclass in this country, indeed I suspect in any country, but I'll stick to the Uk as thats my experience.

By and large these are people who are economically and socially disadvantaged, depending upon ones point of view and indeed political leaning, their situation is either due to economic factors or behavioural factors. The Tories liked to call them "troubled families", I suspect its a bit of both, but if one is born into a family that is economically disadvantaged then the perpetuation of a lifestyle isn't unexpected.

Its very easy from a position of relative economic security such as you and I enjoy to assume that everyone has the same life chances, but that is actually not the case, if there is one thing that Covid has revealed is the stark inequality in access to education, health care, housing and jobs etc that exists and its not solely due to people's life choices.

I do remember your exclamation of disbelief when I mentioned the difficult to reach regarding vaccination. They exist, believe it or not there is a significant proportion of the population who for many reasons do not engage with what we would term mainstream society - these reasons include language, cultural, distrust of authority, poverty, lack of education, environment and so on.

I'm not entering into a debate as to why they are hard to reach, except to say that its not just immigrant communities, there are many examples of white (mainly poor) white communities which are equally hard to reach. I'm just saying they exist and in a crisis such as a pandemic, it is foolish to pretend they don't.

I'll accept most of that, maybe my issue is the overuse of both phrases as a coverall for those who fail/choose not to comply. You're right that we 'fat and happy' can't necessarily conceive the difficulties/issues, but many of those within the categories you list somehow aren't that difficult to reach whan it comes to working the benefits system.

To be inclusive on my criticism I'll actually call fire on a category I AM part of (but you didn't list), 'religious' communities. Anyone finding excuse in the words of the religion I follow to avoid vaccination need a straightener IMO, and there are some round the edges. Looking more widely, and its only an anecdote, on (of all things) ITV's Loose women last week, one of the panellists, an uncommitted Muslim, not only said she would have taken the vaccine even if it had included pork products, but her devout mother would have as well, believing (I paraphrase) thather God would accept she would be better alive than dead. Fair play to them

[Geoff Parkstone]

Only to you, and the mischief maker in chief. Most on here know exactly what I mean. What would you call and describe them as...or do you just want to deny their existence?

Hmmmm..... there are 6 people who generally engage in debate on this thread. You, as the user of the phrase don't count as regards understanding it. That leaves 5. By definition Andy and I don't know "exactly what you mean", condemned from your own voice. That leaves 3. Swale, see above has his own perspective on the term. That leaves TTR and MA. Now lets say that they both entirely understand what you mean by the use of this perjorative term.

That would make 2 understanding and 2 not. As noted before, maths is not your greatest strength, but 2 out of 6 no more constitutes "most" than the 2 out of 6 that you've dismissed above as not understanding???

[Geoff Parkstone]

I agree with much of that...I know you’re not an ‘anti vaxer’... I have no time for Javid either... ‘threatening’ MAY not be the best approach...and, as ever, it’ll probably be the lawyers who end up doing very well out of all this.
But you’re wrong and a little naive, imo, on two things...they/you CAN ‘force’ people to go along with something they don’t wish to and you CAN discriminate (or legislate) against certain behaviours.
We do so all the time in all sorts of ways. That is the point of rules and laws.

Agreed, rA, you can force people to do things they don't want to. Like leaving the EU for example. "We do so all the time in all sorts of ways. That is the point of rules and laws." I would assume that you expect people to respect and obey these rules as well, and not militate against them, as the anti vaxxers do. So should we presume that now you will accept Brexit and stop railing against it?

[Trickytreesreds]

Agreed, rA, you can force people to do things they don't want to. Like leaving the EU for example. "We do so all the time in all sorts of ways. That is the point of rules and laws." I would assume that you expect people to respect and obey these rules as well, and not militate against them, as the anti vaxxers do. So should we presume that now you will accept Brexit and stop railing against it?

Incooooooooooooooooooooooooming

[ramAnag]

I'll accept most of that, maybe my issue is the overuse of both phrases as a coverall for those who fail/choose not to comply. You're right that we 'fat and happy' can't necessarily conceive the difficulties/issues, but many of those within the categories you list somehow aren't that difficult to reach whan it comes to working the benefits system.

To be inclusive on my criticism I'll actually call fire on a category I AM part of (but you didn't list), 'religious' communities. Anyone finding excuse in the words of the religion I follow to avoid vaccination need a straightener IMO, and there are some round the edges. Looking more widely, and its only an anecdote, on (of all things) ITV's Loose women last week, one of the panellists, an uncommitted Muslim, not only said she would have taken the vaccine even if it had included pork products, but her devout mother would have as well, believing (I paraphrase) thather God would accept she would be better alive than dead. Fair play to them

Andy, I’m sorry...that’s nonsense. You know as well as I do that I have never used the word ‘underclass’ as a ‘coverall’ for those who fail to comply.
I have mentioned a number of categories including certain religious groups, the pregnant, those who want to become pregnant and are alarmed by some of the information available, the lazy and awkward AND the ‘underclass’ who are ‘difficult to reach’ because of their lack of awareness, lack of communication skills or lack of address and general rootlessness.
This was done to death a while ago...I don’t know why you’ve started it up again. If there is no underclass in your world I can only suggest you need to remove your blinkers and maybe look a little bit further than ‘Loose Women’.

[ramAnag]

Agreed, rA, you can force people to do things they don't want to. Like leaving the EU for example. "We do so all the time in all sorts of ways. That is the point of rules and laws." I would assume that you expect people to respect and obey these rules as well, and not militate against them, as the anti vaxxers do. So should we presume that now you will accept Brexit and stop railing against it?

I’m going to ignore your tedious and overused taunts about my self confessed mathematical limitations, save to compare them with your apparent similar shortage of common sense, and move on.

To the best of my knowledge there is no rule or law (yet) telling me that I have to respect the philosophy of Brexit...and yet in everything I have done since Brexit (and Covid) I have complied with all the relevant rules...eg stood in stupidly, and previously unnecessarily, long queues to have my passport stamped in a way that hasn’t previously been necessary since the seventies.

In respect of being governed by ‘rules and laws in all sorts of ways’ and Tricky’s suggestion that you can’t tell people what to do, let’s look at a couple of examples.
He doesn’t like the obvious analogy with smoking in public so let’s look elsewhere.
When I was at college back in the ‘70’s I used to enjoy smoking cannabis and dabbled a little with other ‘soft’ drugs. I was fully aware that if I was ever caught it would automatically spell the end of any future teaching career. As it was, a couple of very close calls apart, I got away with it, but the law told me I couldn’t smoke dope (even though I still believe it to be less harmful than nicotine and alcohol) and the rules told me that if I got caught I’d be chucked off any teaching course.

Likewise, and I’ll endeavour to find one more applicable to our ‘red’ friend, TTR likes to drive fast and has, I believe, a new and quite powerful BMW.
It’s probably capable of speeds well in excess of twice the legal limit in this country. I’m not entirely certain what the point of that is, but each to their own and I do recognise the pleasure in being able to accelerate quickly etc.
Unfortunately for fans of such big engined speed mobiles the law of this country is that we can drive no faster than 70 mph. Doubtless Tricky, and indeed I do the same, will have broken the speed limit on numerous occasions and yet he knows that if he is caught using his car’s full capabilities he runs the risk of a ban, a fine, or even something more extreme. Another remarkably basic example of how we are told what to do and how this moderates our behaviour.

There are literally thousands more examples but I hope being told you can’t smoke cannabis or drive your car at the speeds it is potentially capable of would make the point that you can indeed tell people what to do and what not to do...and we regularly do.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Hey, Ive not been disagreeing with your point about the state being able to tell us what to do and what not to. As you say there are many many examples, and many people undergoing custodial sentences by virtue of non compliance. There are rules/laws to govern your behaviour, and there are consequences for non compliance.

In your case, your pothead status may have jeopardised your career, but you took the risk..... in your second example of the 140mph car (I don't understand the complexities thereof) you would jeopardise your own life, but also that of many others with non compliance - in fact jeopardise those lives even at 50mph if driven like a ****. Oh and of course contribute towards the destruction of the planet.

Where is this debate going? I have no clue - at best it would seem that we are discussing different consequences for different breaches of the rules? For smoking in a pub, you get thrown out; for speeding in your car there are a whole range of penalties; for breaking the covax rules you lose your job, but only in certain roles; for Brexit, waiting in queues. You choose your course, and there are differing consequences. I dont actually know what TTR is bellyaching about, save that perhaps the consequences of different actions are different, and perhaps in the example of losing your job as a no vaxxer, unreasonable?