Re: Coronavirus
 

‘ Old Boy there’s no reasoning with someone who thinks Covid 19 is a communist plot to keep people in lockdown.’

I didn’t say that. Another twist. I said Communists like to control people.

‘I told you it wouldn’t go away in the summer. It didn’t.’

The variant we were dealing with then did, actually. It was a new variant that changed the infection rate.

‘I told you variants would reduce vaccine efficacy. It did.’

It was always obvious that mutations could do this, and I warned about that ages ago. However, you only really know what the impact of any new mutation is when it happens. The problem with the latest variant from SA is that the scientists are leaping into control freakery before they actually know we have a problem. You seem blind to the fact that we cannot go on like this, year after year.

‘I said there was no evidence it would become less virulent. There isn’t.’

True. No evidence it will be more so, either. However, thus far, SA infections are not leading to increased hospitalisations over other variants, so we will have to see if that changes.

‘How do you propose to recover the economy when rational actors in the economy stay home - at least some of the time - so they don’t get sick?’

I should imagine that the vast majority will carry on as they do now, going into work. Of course if the government continue to enforce isolation a la pingdemic, it goes without saying we will have a problem, but that is not what I am advocating.

‘What proposals do you have to support those businesses your heart bled so much for when they could rely on furlough and other support measures to get them through Christmas? They can’t live on entrepreneurial spirit’

Except that I am not advocating enforced isolation. You are.

A question for you, however. When we have totally ruined the economy and we are all reduced to poverty, how do you propose the NHS will be funded? You’re the economist, apparently. Knock yourself out.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And if education doesn't work? as would appear to be the case?

---------- Post added at 13:42 ---------- Previous post was at 13:41 ----------


You also said scientists wanted to control us, and you still have justified or explained that gibberish either ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Is it you saying there is value in delaying infection? That’s not what I think, unless it is to delay while we get a known solution rolled out. There’s really no point in that now we have the vaccines.

Your comment about protests does not answer my point at all.

I think you are the one who likes to extrapolate to suit your own agenda - there’s plenty of evidence of that in your string of posts.

Re: Coronavirus
 

yes, and what has that got to do with drink driving?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I certainly don’t agree with enforced inoculations!

I think most people understand what I mean when I say the scientists want to control us. They have frightened a portion of the public senseless, offered up wildly inflated future scenarios and come at us continually demanding more action restricting our freedoms. How can you not understand this?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Use the quote function as intended OB. Not doing so is only going to make it more tedious for everyone else to wade through.

I like the fact that, as someone who can’t answer my question on the economy, you’ve thrown one back at me. You can’t get off that easy - many in the hospitality sector have been key to your internal thinking on restrictions - how do you propose to support them when people take personal responsibility and stay home? Do you propose to support them at all? The spiral of economic damage is inevitable.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why is drink driving illegal ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are you trying to evade the argument?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Still no answers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh well, let's hope it doesn't come to that, mind, you're free to leave the country if you don't agree :)

Here's the thing with science, it evolves and constantly changes.

How are you being restricted now?

You're not being restricted, you're being inconvenienced. there's a big difference.

The blame for sensationalism rests more so with the media than it does the boffins

Re: Coronavirus
 

OK, is this better?


‘ Old Boy there’s no reasoning with someone who thinks Covid 19 is a communist plot to keep people in lockdown.’

I didn’t say that. Another twist. I said Communists like to control people.

‘I told you it wouldn’t go away in the summer. It didn’t.’

The variant we were dealing with then did, actually. It was a new variant that changed the infection rate.

‘I told you variants would reduce vaccine efficacy. It did.’

It was always obvious that mutations could do this, and I warned about that ages ago. However, you only really know what the impact of any new mutation is when it happens. The problem with the latest variant from SA is that the scientists are leaping into control freakery before they actually know we have a problem. You seem blind to the fact that we cannot go on like this, year after year.

‘I said there was no evidence it would become less virulent. There isn’t.’

True. No evidence it will be more so, either. However, thus far, SA infections are not leading to increased hospitalisations over other variants, so we will have to see if that changes.

‘How do you propose to recover the economy when rational actors in the economy stay home - at least some of the time - so they don’t get sick?’

I should imagine that the vast majority will carry on as they do now, going into work. Of course if the government continue to enforce isolation a la pingdemic, it goes without saying we will have a problem, but that is not what I am advocating.

‘What proposals do you have to support those businesses your heart bled so much for when they could rely on furlough and other support measures to get them through Christmas? They can’t live on entrepreneurial spirit’

Except that I am not advocating enforced isolation. You are.

A question for you, however. When we have totally ruined the economy and we are all reduced to poverty, how do you propose the NHS will be funded? You’re the economist, apparently. Knock yourself out.

As for your last comment, people should be going to work, not staying at home unless legally required to do so. And I do not believe there is any necessity to impose such a requirement at present.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's an obvious question,

We didn't ban drink driving for a laugh, we banned it because of the health risk to both oneself and the wider public.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm not playing childish games with you, make your point or go and annoy someone else.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's been made, don't spoil what's been an entertaining couple of days of discussion by resorting to 'bratty Piere' :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

No, but I'll persevere.

I fail to see the distinction.

Hahaha quite the straw you are clutching at there. The original Covid variant will be replaced by a worse one was clearly not the intent of your ludicrous claims.

Yet you've denied or ignore the impact of this despite it being 'obvious' to you in retrospect.

However this wasn't your claim - another classic movement of goalposts from you, OB. I'd have an easier time nailing jelly to a wall.

People aren't cancelling bookings in restaurants and hotels because of a so called pingdemic, Old Boy. They don't want to catch Covid.

So you have no proposals to support the distressed sections of the economy, other than encouraging individuals to act against their own rational interests to avoid illness?

Again this isn't linked to the downturn in hospitality bookings. Answer the question as asked - given the downturn in hospitality do you propose doing anything to support this sector? Surely we must do all we can to offer financial support to these budding entrepreneurs? Who will fund the NHS if they. go under?