March 29th - 'Organised Outdoor Sports Can Take Place'

GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
That is an exception and also a massive generalisation for the people of Liverpool. Anything actually worth reading (not opinions, no offence) shows public adherence has been very good. I wouldn't rule it out, of course, but again I would suggest that factors like poor sick pay is much more of a factor then a pub blow out to the point the latter becomes basically insignificant.  Sorry to say but you haven't offered me anything substantial to which I would change my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Sorry but no, it's nothing against the people of Liverpool as it happened in places all over the country. Liverpool was purely the first example that came to mind.

I have no doubt that low income areas have suffered more, in large part down to population density which makes it easier for viruses to spread. Low sick pay however is only a factor if you're sick and to be quite frank, if you're sick with COVID and you choose to go to work and mix with others then you're an arse (regardless of income). You're right that in general adherence has been good - while in lockdown - but the rate of increases in cases when restrictions have been lifted demonstrate that when allowed to mix, people spread the virus. Viruses cannot spread without interaction, it's a simple biological fact. If you look at the figures in Sept/Oct in the South West for example, the hotspots were in University towns when students were told to go back. That is not a coincidence.

 
Lozart said:
Sorry but no, it's nothing against the people of Liverpool as it happened in places all over the country. Liverpool was purely the first example that came to mind.

I have no doubt that low income areas have suffered more, in large part down to population density which makes it easier for viruses to spread. Low sick pay however is only a factor if you're sick and to be quite frank, if you're sick with COVID and you choose to go to work and mix with others then you're an arse (regardless of income). You're right that in general adherence has been good - while in lockdown - but the rate of increases in cases when restrictions have been lifted demonstrate that when allowed to mix, people spread the virus. Viruses cannot spread without interaction, it's a simple biological fact. If you look at the figures in Sept/Oct in the South West for example, the hotspots were in University towns when students were told to go back. That is not a coincidence.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I'm not debating the effectiveness of lockdowns. I am taking issue with your claim that "the general public can't bloody behave themselves." which I still think you have failed to substanitate.

- "Low sick pay however is only a factor if you're sick and to be quite frank, if you're sick with COVID and you choose to go to work and mix with others then you're an arse (regardless of income)."

No it is a factor if you have to stop working, whether or not you are sick. I disagree that people are an arse, regardless of income - some people quite simply need to work for them and thier families to survive. Some people quite simply cannot afford to not work, and calling them an arse - and not the government who could quite easily support them better, is counterproductive, not to mention the bitter taste it leaves. 

-"but the rate of increases in cases when restrictions have been lifted demonstrate that when allowed to mix, people spread the virus"

if people are allowed to mix, then this is not a matter of them behaving themselves.

"If you look at the figures in Sept/Oct in the South West for example, the hotspots were in University towns when students were told to go back. That is not a coincidence."

- Told to go back is doing heavy lifting here. A spike in cases arising from this is not their fault 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s generally a disease on poverty. In the late summer Cornwall nearly sank under the weight of generally higher wage earning emmets (holiday makers), afterwards they were in the lowest tiers prior to lockdown so covid had not been imported. 
blackpool, Scarborough etc the traditional “working class” holiday destinations were like WWZ and were in tier 4 pretty much as soon as possible 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@GeorgePlaysAirsoft I have to agree with @Lozart on people’s stupidity and the fact they cannot self regulate - just look at the Xmas fair in Nottingham , the council where stupid to allow it to go ahead in the first place and then the public for absolutely ramming it hard on the Saturday only for it to be closed the following day which in all sense was stupid from start to finish considering Nottingham was in Tier 3 at the time.

I’l quote from the Nottingham Post report 

"it didn't make sense" considering the Tier 3 measures.

"There were also protests on and no social distancing.

"No one was listening to the one-way system it was just a free for all.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
I'm not debating the effectiveness of lockdowns. I am taking issue with your claim that "the general public can't bloody behave themselves." which I still think you have failed to substanitate.

- "Low sick pay however is only a factor if you're sick and to be quite frank, if you're sick with COVID and you choose to go to work and mix with others then you're an arse (regardless of income)."

No it is a factor if you have to stop working, whether or not you are sick. I disagree that people are an arse, regardless of income - some people quite simply need to work for them and thier families to survive. Some people quite simply cannot afford to not work, and calling them an arse - and not the government who could quite easily support them better, is counterproductive, not to mention the bitter taste it leaves. 

-"but the rate of increases in cases when restrictions have been lifted demonstrate that when allowed to mix, people spread the virus"

if people are allowed to mix, then this is not a matter of them behaving themselves.

"If you look at the figures in Sept/Oct in the South West for example, the hotspots were in University towns when students were told to go back. That is not a coincidence."

- Told to go back is doing heavy lifting here. A spike in cases arising from this is not their fault 
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...




OK, we're clearly never going to agree here because what I say is evidence you don't accept.

SSP is for when you are sick or self isolating due to exposure. Not just because you've had to stop working. Knowingly continuing to work while sick or after exposure to the virus is wilfully ignorant at best, regardless of who you are, how much you earn or where you live. Will it put you at a financial disadvantage? Yes, very possibly. Does continuing to work regardless of you potentially infecting others who may in fact be MORE vulnerable than you make you a dick? Yes. Yes it does.

When people were allowed to meet up in groups of no more than six outside, there were plenty of examples of groups of way more than that mixing (be it playing football in the park or having parties, whatever). It happened, fact. THAT is what I mean by the fact that people won't follow the guidance if they think they can get away with it. You CANNOT blame anyone other than the individuals that choose to bend the rules to suit them. It's not the governments fault that half the people I see every day can't seem to work out that a mask is supposed to cover your nose AND mouth. It's not the governments fault that people drive too fast. It's not the governments fault that people get pissed and hurt themselves. All these things are examples where personal responsibility HAS to enter the mix. When you allow students to go back to universities, they WILL go to the bar, they WILL get pissed and the rules of social distancing WILL go out the window. Is that the governments fault? No.

 
Another example of people not behaving is from my own city of Leicester where people was out bloody dancing in the snow on Spinney Hill park last month.

Well on the plus side at least I know I should be, hopefully, possibly, maybe back working from the 12th April 

 
MiK said:
@GeorgePlaysAirsoft I have to agree with @Lozart on people’s stupidity and the fact they cannot self regulate - just look at the Xmas fair in Nottingham , the council where stupid to allow it to go ahead in the first place and then the public for absolutely ramming it hard on the Saturday only for it to be closed the following day which in all sense was stupid from start to finish considering Nottingham was in Tier 3 at the time.

I’l quote from the Nottingham Post report 

"it didn't make sense" considering the Tier 3 measures.

"There were also protests on and no social distancing.

"No one was listening to the one-way system it was just a free for all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Couldn't care less about personal anecdotes. I've seen people break rules of course, but i'm not sure how useful this blame game is, nor is turning molehills into mountains by

GenuineGerman said:
The scenes on Bournemouth beach as well last summer.  
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Excellent example of media hysteria and "hate they neighbour" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/19/how-the-beach-super-spreader-myth-can-inform-uks-future-covid-response 

Lozart said:
OK, we're clearly never going to agree here because what I say is evidence you don't accept.

SSP is for when you are sick or self isolating due to exposure. Not just because you've had to stop working. Knowingly continuing to work while sick or after exposure to the virus is wilfully ignorant at best, regardless of who you are, how much you earn or where you live. Will it put you at a financial disadvantage? Yes, very possibly. Does continuing to work regardless of you potentially infecting others who may in fact be MORE vulnerable than you make you a dick? Yes. Yes it does.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


I don't care if you think people are being dicks. I'm interested in proper solutions and the obvious solution is increasing sickpay and other measures of (mostly financial) support. I personally don't have the stomach to criticise people when I've been working from home no dramas no loss of income etc. People need support to follow the rules. There is the carrot and there is the stick and I think here the carrot is much more helpful. 

"When you allow students to go back to universities, they WILL go to the bar, they WILL get pissed and the rules of social distancing WILL go out the window. Is that the governments fault? No."

The simple answer here to is to suggest, given this, that students should not of returned to university. 

[SIZE=12.6px]I'm happy to accept evidence and change my mind, this is not a matter of faith to me, it is just my opinion. But all you have provided is anecdotes which is obvious to anyone. Have people broken the rules? Of course! Have, given everything, the public "behaved" quite well - yes. Not to sound silly but we are talking about "the public" as in, the entire population! Evidently personal [/SIZE]responsibility[SIZE=12.6px] comes into play but to say this is purely a matter of individual responsibility is nonsensical. The only reason lockdowns are effective is that people follow the rules. [/SIZE]

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
Excellent example of media hysteria and "hate they neighbour" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/19/how-the-beach-super-spreader-myth-can-inform-uks-future-covid-response 
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That not the point really, there was guidance in place that involved social distancing and i really didn't see it being done. You also cite the Guardian and they say that this couldn't have caused a "super spreader event". I think knowing what we know now this is probably wrong.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MiK said:
Another example of people not behaving is from my own city of Leicester where people was out bloody dancing in the snow on Spinney Hill park last month.

Well on the plus side at least I know I should be, hopefully, possibly, maybe back working from the 12th April 
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Leicester has been on perma-lockdown for ages, i doubt people "dancing outside" is the biggest issue !

GenuineGerman said:
That not the point really, there was guidance in place that involved social distancing and i really didn't see it being done. You also cite the Guardian you say that this couldn't have caused a "super spreader event". I think knowing what we know now this is probably wrong.   
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No the point is you chose an obvious example of people breaking the rules which has subsequently been proven to have had a minute (if at all) impact on anything. That article is from a few days ago so I'm not quite sure I understand your last point, apologies. Once again I'm not saying that people haven't broken the rules, but I'm saying that all things considered, most people haven't, and the adherence has been surprisingly good. "behavioural fatigue" was something discussed fairly often early on but hasn't really come to pass, substantially anyway. I think we should give ourselves a big pat on the back.

peace all! 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
"When you allow students to go back to universities, they WILL go to the bar, they WILL get pissed and the rules of social distancing WILL go out the window. Is that the governments fault? No."

The simple answer here to is to suggest, given this, that students should not of returned to university. 
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


No, you're right, they shouldn't have returned to university, except there was MASSIVE public pressure to get the kids back to school and students back to Uni. If the government had insisted that actually, the students aren't allowed back until the threat of coronavirus is eliminated people would be criticising them for that too. They were allowed to go back under the prevailing guidance of mask wearing, social distancing etc. The fact that the university towns had massive spikes in infections when the students went back would suggest that those same students weren't being sufficiently careful. Now, I'm no idiot, I know that correlation isn't the same as causality but sometimes it really does match up.

GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
I think we should give ourselves a big pat on the back.

peace all! 
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


You know what, yes. 

By and large the public has behaved itself. I'm still not convinced that the general public en masse can be trusted to do the right thing all the time but there you go. That's obviously just me being cynical.

Now go and wash your hands.

 
GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
Couldn't care less about personal anecdotes. I've seen people break rules of course, but i'm not sure how useful this blame game is, nor is turning molehills into mountains by
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I wasn’t giving personal anecdotes just facts and the fact is people can be/are selfish and/or stupid and probably those are the ones who shout loudest when things go wrong.

I have followed the rules to the letter of the law and I even walk my doggo’s at silly’o’clock to avoid anyone but me playing by said rules it doesn’t stop two people travelling against the rules getting stuck on a mountain only for one of the rescuers to fall and end up with life changing injuries.

I would love you to explain that “molehill” away to the injured volunteer.

I do live in Leicester Yes, and as I have said I have been playing by the rules but due to *&^%€£%^€£!!! I have like you said been in semi-permanent lockdown and my business is in the shitter but seriously why should I keep on paying for others “i don’t care” attitude?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GeorgePlaysAirsoft said:
No the point is you chose an obvious example of people breaking the rules which has subsequently been proven to have had a minute (if at all) impact on anything. That article is from a few days ago so I'm not quite sure I understand your last point, apologies. Once again I'm not saying that people haven't broken the rules, but I'm saying that all things considered, most people haven't, and the adherence has been surprisingly good. "behavioural fatigue" was something discussed fairly often early on but hasn't really come to pass, substantially anyway. I think we should give ourselves a big pat on the back.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I completely agree with you the majority of people have stuck to the rules which is great but a significant minority haven't be that because they think its a hoax, think they don't have a responsibility to their fellow citizens or some other delusional reasoning. This isn't just one case of people ignoring the rules its constant. Why do i play by the rules, because i want this end as much as everyone else but if all us don't play by the rules this will last for a lot longer. Peace to you as well  :)

 
Lozart said:
No, you're right, they shouldn't have returned to university
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
And that's where the buck stops.

There wasn't much public pressure for students to return to Uni - I'm really not sure where you got that from, and I'd love to see some sources that support your view here.

My understanding - and recollection - is that the Government (specifically, Gavin Williamson) pushed extremely hard for students to return to uni - Crucially, promising that students would have significant levels of support which weren't actually offered by the unis upon their return. Here's a statement offered by Williamson in Parliament last year, September: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/return-of-students-to-universities-statement

Of course, there's mention of "social distancing, abiding by local guidelines" etc. - but the key point, here, is that the Government made a decision to facilitate the mass-migration of (a maximum of) 1.8 million students cross-country. Some students were idiot and didn't abide by guidelines - but that's unavoidable. The choice to send them to uni, was.

 
DrAlexanderTobacco said:
And that's where the buck stops.

There wasn't much public pressure for students to return to Uni - I'm really not sure where you got that from, and I'd love to see some sources that support your view here.

My understanding - and recollection - is that the Government (specifically, Gavin Williamson) pushed extremely hard for students to return to uni - Crucially, promising that students would have significant levels of support which weren't actually offered by the unis upon their return. Here's a statement offered by Williamson in Parliament last year, September: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/return-of-students-to-universities-statement

Of course, there's mention of "social distancing, abiding by local guidelines" etc. - but the key point, here, is that the Government made a decision to facilitate the mass-migration of (a maximum of) 1.8 million students cross-country. Some students were idiot and didn't abide by guidelines - but that's unavoidable. The choice to send them to uni, was.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


My point is that a decision by government be it right or wrong, does not absolve people from taking personal responsibility for their actions.

 
Whether it's big events, or the activities of lone individuals, everyone who doesn't do their utmost (within reason ?) to prevent the possible spread has responsibility, but unfortunately there are some, & I'm not talking about the loony denier's, just regular people who still don't accept the seriousness of this situation that's been with us for over a year FFS, & still keep taking chances with the lives of others.

A recent good example, mobile hairdresser in East Sussex, even though visiting other households was strictly forbidden, she kept working, EVEN WHEN SHE TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVID, & when found out she was given a fine......FFS SHE SHOULD HAVE BEEN LOCKED UP?

When your up against that kind of ignorance & stupidity within society, what chance have the vulnerable amongst us got ☹️ 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lozart said:
My point is that a decision by government be it right or wrong, does not absolve people from taking personal responsibility for their actions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You're right. My point, though, is that you're wrong to expect people to follow the rules completely, just as well as being wrong to attribute the current situation to their actions. Government > Joe Q Public > Yourself. That's the hierarchy of blame here.

So, applying my argument to George's point here - and to bring your own point in:

Knowingly continuing to work while sick or after exposure to the virus is wilfully ignorant at best, regardless of who you are, how much you earn or where you live.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This was, and is, always going to happen. I totally appreciate the moral high ground, and I've held the view before in the past. But I can assure you that someone barely surviving on minimum wage, trying to keep employment, their flat, their kids, whatever - doesn't give a shit because they're trying to survive. Some people genuinely can't miss a single shift or they're destitute, or applying for emergency housing.

To that end, George's point is valid - the Government needed to do more to support those who will otherwise break the law/guidance. I can't see how you're content to blame a large, disparate group when the group in question is reacting to a lack of controls in place to stop deviation.

 
DrAlexanderTobacco said:
You're right. My point, though, is that you're wrong to expect people to follow the rules completely, just as well as being wrong to attribute the current situation to their actions. Government > Joe Q Public > Yourself. That's the hierarchy of blame here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


OK, this was my original point ie we'll all be able to go back airsofting at the end of March assuming enough people follow the rules. Which they won't so let's not be all shocked and upset and blame the government when plans get pushed back.

This was, and is, always going to happen. I totally appreciate the moral high ground, and I've held the view before in the past. But I can assure you that someone barely surviving on minimum wage, trying to keep employment, their flat, their kids, whatever - doesn't give a shit because they're trying to survive. Some people genuinely can't miss a single shift or they're destitute, or applying for emergency housing.

To that end, George's point is valid - the Government needed to do more to support those who will otherwise break the law/guidance. I can't see how you're content to blame a large, disparate group when the group in question is reacting to a lack of controls in place to stop deviation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


OK, yes you have a very valid point. I am speaking from a position of privilege in that I am still working and can afford my bills. Yes, the government should do more to support those that need it, not just those with a low income though. Businesses need support to be able to continue employing people so they can pay the tax to pay support the lower earners. For example - the Coronavirus relief for businesses was linked to the address. Only one company can claim for that address so if you share premises you're shit out of luck if your landlord has already claimed for the property you work out of.

Also - please don't assume that I was singling out the poor for being wilfully ignorant and flouting the guidance. Stupidity knows no societal bounds!

 
Lozart said:
OK, this was my original point ie we'll all be able to go back airsofting at the end of March assuming enough people follow the rules. Which they won't so let's not be all shocked and upset and blame the government when plans get pushed back.

OK, yes you have a very valid point. I am speaking from a position of privilege in that I am still working and can afford my bills. Yes, the government should do more to support those that need it, not just those with a low income though. Businesses need support to be able to continue employing people so they can pay the tax to pay support the lower earners. For example - the Coronavirus relief for businesses was linked to the address. Only one company can claim for that address so if you share premises you're shit out of luck if your landlord has already claimed for the property you work out of.

Also - please don't assume that I was singling out the poor for being wilfully ignorant and flouting the guidance. Stupidity knows no societal bounds!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fair play, apols if we were talking past each other here - didn't mean to single you out for hating on the poors either! Just trying to add context about why some level of govt support can help guard against otherwise-unavoidable behaviour.

E: @Tackle's point about the self employed hairdresser is a good one for my point as well - continuing to work with Covid is disgusting, and I support the notion she needs to catch a prison sentence for that. But equally the disparity between the support FTEs received, compared to those who're self employed, is a vast gulf - HMRC had years of PAYE database info to quickly organise the Furlough scheme, but their way of accounting for self employed earnings differs pretty hugely and they weren't able to build a good baseline of how much to pay, to how many.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top