You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus
October 26 2020 6.24pm

Coronavirus

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 622 of 629 < 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 >

 

View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 17 Oct 20 10.00pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by Mapletree

What insults?

Questioning my numeracy skills. You do it to other posters too. And not just numeracy. It's a form of bullying. Behaving in a haughty, I know better than you manner. It really doesn't bother me as you clearly don't. I just think you should stop with the petty snipes. It's detracting from debate.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Rudi Hedman's Profile Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 17 Oct 20 10.10pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Sorry about your business and I lost my home.
The point is the help wasnt there in the 80s as we both found out. No eviction delays,no Grants, no furlough,no free loans, nothing. This artificial recession has put business on hold. Shops, cafes,gyms,offices etc will all be up and running again as they are needed. Might be different owners and operators but they will be back. In the 80s a lot wernt needed. There was too much of the same thing so competition was a lot fiercer. An example being cafes nowadays or formally on high streets.
There could be 8 or more but all thriving very well. They will be thriving again for sure.
Back to point I think to not be bothered about a positive associating with you knowingly is wrong imo.

I’m not sure about that. If there’s still a virus, masks, unemployment, working from home, habit of eating at home or buying everything at the supermarket then I’m not as confident as you. In some areas some will survive. But the margins in eating out are small and the amount of covers (customers) needs to be high.

Plus there’s more working and shopping from home. A big concern of mine is small businesses vanishing and big businesses making that race to the bottom in wages faster. We’ve seen acceleration in shopping online away from the high street and getting used to never leaving the house that would’ve taken decades.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 17 Oct 20 10.18pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

It looks like around a 1 in 40 chance of dying.
Personal health and age accepted.
40 million have had it and 1 million have died.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Rudi Hedman's Profile Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 17 Oct 20 10.24pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

It looks like around a 1 in 40 chance of dying.
Personal health and age accepted.
40 million have had it and 1 million have died.

Where have you got those stats? Are they just reported cases? Talk of actual cases being 10 times higher than reported in spring/summer.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 17 Oct 20 10.28pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Sorry about your business and I lost my home.
The point is the help wasnt there in the 80s as we both found out. No eviction delays,no Grants, no furlough,no free loans, nothing. This artificial recession has put business on hold. Shops, cafes,gyms,offices etc will all be up and running again as they are needed. Might be different owners and operators but they will be back. In the 80s a lot wernt needed. There was too much of the same thing so competition was a lot fiercer. An example being cafes nowadays or formally on high streets.
There could be 8 or more but all thriving very well. They will be thriving again for sure.
Back to point I think to not be bothered about a positive associating with you knowingly is wrong imo.

Don't be sorry for my business crash, I'm still here, as you are after losing your house.

The bit in bold is exactly why the problem is worse this time. All of that money "free loans", people on "furlough", "grants" etc., needs to be paid back. We didn't have that in the 80's. We had inflation rates going through the roof. 22% in 1980!!!! But it fell to 4 or 5 % by '83. That helped a load. But there was no debt to pay back. Which will impact every working person in the country (that isn't fiddling). And do you think we won't reach 12.5% of the population being unemployed if we persist with lockdowns?

Now some conspiracy...

People are being laid off every day as their bosses realise that their time in the office was pointless. Just let one person do 3 peoples work from home.
They can work 16 hour days. Who will know?

Maybe not. But....maybe????

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 17 Oct 20 10.32pm Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

So, if it kills them in a slow and painful manner, because it had a fatal flaw, is ok?

Here we go again. If I got a pound each time I got a sensible reply from you I'd be broke. As you well know before you wasted my time in giving a serious and considered reply, the vaccines are going through large scale studies.

If you're going to play the fool with 'if it kills them in a slow and painful manner', I may as well say well if it doesn't do that and they don't have the vaccine then that becomes the risk. In all likelihood, due to how vulnerable certain groups are, your frankensteins monster reality of how it will pan out probably isn't helpful or in the least bit realistic.

Edited by BlueJay (17 Oct 2020 10.39pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 17 Oct 20 10.35pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

It looks like around a 1 in 40 chance of dying.
Personal health and age accepted.
40 million have had it and 1 million have died.

That's rubbish. You have as much chance of being killed walking down the street as c-19. Who is giving you this nonsense? It's clearly working to scare the life out of you, so who are you listening to?

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 17 Oct 20 10.38pm Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

Questioning my numeracy skills. You do it to other posters too. And not just numeracy. It's a form of bullying. Behaving in a haughty, I know better than you manner. It really doesn't bother me as you clearly don't. I just think you should stop with the petty snipes. It's detracting from debate.

Give it a rest. You have very effete sensitivities for someone who routinely lays it down like you're reading from a stone tablet whenever you reply to anyone. "You questioned my numeracy, it's bullying". *hands over tissue*

Edited by BlueJay (17 Oct 2020 10.54pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 17 Oct 20 10.46pm Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

That's rubbish. You have as much chance of being killed walking down the street as c-19.

Wow what a helpful way of viewing it, Tim. Take a breath and realise that not everything is about point scoring. Some people in various demographics are perfectly 'good to go' whereas others have people they care about that they know they need to very much look out for during this difficult time. Analogies about how its as dangerous to walk down the street perhaps aren't all that reassuring to them.

That's the sad thing about this thread. Even a benign statement about how it's understandable that certain demographics are hopeful for positive results in vaccine studies, gets turned into some kind of multi page house of horrors scenario with no recognition that it may well end up being a' good thing'. I certainly take Becky's comment on board and fully appreciate that perspective, but it inevitably becomes more of a 'pile in' situation on here, whereas the usual mad takes get a free pass. Anything other than 'everyone should just return to normal' sets some off on a panic attack.

Edited by BlueJay (17 Oct 2020 10.53pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 17 Oct 20 10.53pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

Originally posted by BlueJay

Here we go again. If I got a pound each time I got a sensible reply from you I'd be broke. As you well know before you wasted my time in giving a serious and considered reply, the vaccines are going through large scale studies.

If you're going to play the fool with 'if it kills them in a slow and painful manner', I may as well say well if it doesn't do that and they don't have the vaccine then that becomes the risk. In all likelihood, due to how vulnerable certain groups are, your frankensteins monster reality of how it will pan out probably isn't helpful.

Edited by BlueJay (17 Oct 2020 10.33pm)

It's this kind of reasoning that unleashed Thalidomide on the world. (Did you ever encounter the results?)

In your small mind, that's ok.

You can waste your time as much as you like, but you cannot state that a vaccine developed in record time can be considered safe. It cannot. I gave a worst case scenario. You dismiss it. Which is what is causing these restrictions. But you seem fine with those.

Also, you have started to resort to talking down to me. Again. Once you start to talk down to people, you lose all respect.

Can you not see that it might be possible that the vaccine that is presented to the public might be flawed? Or are you clinging to your own "safety blanket"? Because after all, we are all talking if's, maybe's and perhaps? Nothing is known.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Tim Gypsy Hill '64's Profile Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Flag Stoke sub normal 17 Oct 20 10.59pm Send a Private Message to Tim Gypsy Hill '64 Add Tim Gypsy Hill '64 as a friend

In fact I cannot be bothered to try and debate with such a closed mind as you have Blue Jay. You try to impose your ideas, but don't listen to others. The vaccine will not be safe for years, as stated by Becky. So we will have to lockdown until then according to you. You need help.

 


Systematically dragged down by the lawmakers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View BlueJay's Profile BlueJay Flag UK 17 Oct 20 11.06pm Send a Private Message to BlueJay Add BlueJay as a friend

Originally posted by Tim Gypsy Hill '64

It's this kind of reasoning that unleashed Thalidomide on the world. (Did you ever encounter the results?)

In your small mind, that's ok.

Yes, yes of course it is. Those in especially vulnerable groups where they're at risk from death anyway getting access to a vaccine following mass stage 3 studies, really are responsible for attitudes that result in disabled children. Thanks for the insight.

Quote

Also, you have started to resort to talking down to me. Again. Once you start to talk down to people, you lose all respect.

Your 'in your small mind', and disingenuous 'i'm just asking' guff before having silly flippant responses to considered replies is par of the course for you. You routinely talk in some grandiose fashion to people and then are affronted when they reply in a matter of fact way back. Get over yourself.

Quote

Can you not see that it might be possible that the vaccine that is presented to the public might be flawed? Or are you clinging to your own "safety blanket"? Because after all, we are all talking if's, maybe's and perhaps? Nothing is known.

What's 'the vaccine' when it's at home? There are 11 stage three vaccines in mass testing, a few of which are being tested in this country. I'm not saying that they are being handed over by Christ himself. If you live on the same planet as the rest of us you'll await the study results that are out in a month or so and then deduce from that whether the vaccines appear to be a non starter of something that will potentially save countless lives. And then from there, if people are especially at risk they can make a choice. Is it pointless argument day for you? If someone feels they will benefit they can have it, if they don't then don't. We can all play 'what if' in either direction.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 622 of 629 < 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Coronavirus