Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 276 to 300 of 468

Thread: Lockdown

  1. #276
    In The South Stand KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,737
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simeon Stylites View Post
    Ah, I see your question. The answer is still yes, as this study, published in August, shows: https://www.advisory.com/daily-brief...0/asymptomatic
    Thanks. Interesting stuff. It's perhaps no wonder that this virus seems to be two steps ahead of everything done to stop it!
    I know that some of you one here are blaming the government, but, the pattern is repeated throughout Europe and the rest of the world, on all sides of the political spectrum.
    Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford, Burnham, Kahn...The strain is there to see on their faces. I wouldn't swap places with any of them!

  2. #277
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    Thanks. Interesting stuff. It's perhaps no wonder that this virus seems to be two steps ahead of everything done to stop it!
    I know that some of you one here are blaming the government, but, the pattern is repeated throughout Europe and the rest of the world, on all sides of the political spectrum.
    Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford, Burnham, Kahn...The strain is there to see on their faces. I wouldn't swap places with any of them!
    Good player.


  3. #278
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,388
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Simeon Stylites View Post
    Saddened wrote: For what? To save at worst 400,000 lives, 95%+ of whom will be 80+.

    There’s a lot to comment on in your latest posts. I agree with your central contention that saving lives and saving the economy are linked. But just commenting on your figures, I think you are not using reliable figures. Firstly the average age of death from C19 in the first wave was 82. In the second wave that is likely to be lower, but it is obviously a moving figure at the moment. And 400,000, where does that come from? What actions do we take to get to that figure? Finally, C19 kills people directly and indirectly, as you say. But to date, C19 direct deaths make up two thirds of the excess deaths for this year. We don’t know how that proportion might change as the virus gets into its stride again, but most medics predict a higher proportion of excess deaths directly from C19 than from indirect causes, such as cancelling operations or other treatment.
    What we need to check the virus is effective test and trace; the fact that we do not have it, and the fact that the NHS does not have sufficient staff or appropriate facilities to treat c19 and nonC19 patients during the pandemic are political choices made by this government and its predecessors since 2008.
    Simon I enjoy reading your rare posts as they are always well thought out and informed.
    When this virus struck figures of 12-15% death rate were used as the reason for lockdown, when that did not materialise it was done to protect the Health Services, now with a death rate of 2.6% we are still locking down.
    The NHS is and has been chronically underfunded for decades, why shut business down that will impact this even further ?

  4. #279
    In The South Stand KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,737
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    Good player.
    Doh!

    ...But you can the strain on his face!

  5. #280
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    970
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    Thanks. Interesting stuff. It's perhaps no wonder that this virus seems to be two steps ahead of everything done to stop it!
    I know that some of you one here are blaming the government, but, the pattern is repeated throughout Europe and the rest of the world, on all sides of the political spectrum.
    Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford, Burnham, Kahn...The strain is there to see on their faces. I wouldn't swap places with any of them!
    For all the faults that we have rightly been complaining about, we should have a sense of perspective, I was speaking to a relative who lives in quite an affluent area of California last night, when I told her that I had a positive test result within twenty four hours, she was quite incredulous saying unless you had been hospitalised it takes at least three days for a result usually four.or five

  6. #281
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    271
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    Simon I enjoy reading your rare posts as they are always well thought out and informed.
    When this virus struck figures of 12-15% death rate were used as the reason for lockdown, when that did not materialise it was done to protect the Health Services, now with a death rate of 2.6% we are still locking down.
    The NHS is and has been chronically underfunded for decades, why shut business down that will impact this even further ?
    Thank you, that makes me feel good! I can't reply substantively for a few days, but I will.

  7. #282
    In The South Stand KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,737
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    ...When this virus struck figures of 12-15% death rate were used as the reason for lockdown, when that did not materialise it was done to protect the Health Services, now with a death rate of 2.6% we are still locking down.
    The NHS is and has been chronically underfunded for decades, why shut business down that will impact this even further ?
    The Locomotive Act 1865 saw people walking in front of the early motor cars with a red warning flag.
    Fast forward to now. People still die on the roads, but we now have driving tests, MOTs, seat belts and numerous other safety features in cars and on the roads. The level of risk and associated deaths are seen as acceptable.
    Unfortunately, with Covid 19, we are still at the flag waiving stage.

  8. #283
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,176
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    Doh!

    ...But you can the strain on his face!
    Constipation ??

  9. #284
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,388
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    The Locomotive Act 1865 saw people walking in front of the early motor cars with a red warning flag.
    Fast forward to now. People still die on the roads, but we now have driving tests, MOTs, seat belts and numerous other safety features in cars and on the roads. The level of risk and associated deaths are seen as acceptable.
    Unfortunately, with Covid 19, we are still at the flag waiving stage.
    Kentish your points in posts are also well noted. In this case though we have to compare apples with apples.
    We have shut down the world for a mortality rate of 2.6% and that does not make sense. A 49% of people are asymptomatic, another 36% will suffer from mild symptoms, that is 85% of the population. A smaller sliding scale of over 68`s and every seven years after that are in danger along with immune compromised.
    The problem is underfunding of Health Services not Covid 19.
    The resources should be put into the groups who are most at risk, the rest should just be allowed to continue.
    Governments are making it up as they go along, another lockdown then what? It is a virus that will continue to infect until 65% of the population have contracted it, why not allow it to do this in the summer just gone?
    On a personal note, I have not seen my Mam in person who is 81 years old since the WCC, she usually visits Easter, Summer and Christmas.
    She has not seen her grandchild or great grand children since last Christmas. Though wanting to visit and "b''gger the consequences" her words not mine, restrictions on travel and of course medical insurance mean that cannot happen. This could go on like this for another three to five years if the reports are correct, does my Mam have that long left, so she can physically touch her family?
    This is now turning into a political game that is pushing the boundaries of human rights.
    It has to stop, presently it is fatal to 2.6% of the population and that figure is dropping.

  10. #285
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    Kentish your points in posts are also well noted. In this case though we have to compare apples with apples.
    We have shut down the world for a mortality rate of 2.6% and that does not make sense. A 49% of people are asymptomatic, another 36% will suffer from mild symptoms, that is 85% of the population. A smaller sliding scale of over 68`s and every seven years after that are in danger along with immune compromised.
    The problem is underfunding of Health Services not Covid 19.
    The resources should be put into the groups who are most at risk, the rest should just be allowed to continue.
    Governments are making it up as they go along, another lockdown then what? It is a virus that will continue to infect until 65% of the population have contracted it, why not allow it to do this in the summer just gone?
    On a personal note, I have not seen my Mam in person who is 81 years old since the WCC, she usually visits Easter, Summer and Christmas.
    She has not seen her grandchild or great grand children since last Christmas. Though wanting to visit and "b''gger the consequences" her words not mine, restrictions on travel and of course medical insurance mean that cannot happen. This could go on like this for another three to five years if the reports are correct, does my Mam have that long left, so she can physically touch her family?
    This is now turning into a political game that is pushing the boundaries of human rights.
    It has to stop, presently it is fatal to 2.6% of the population and that figure is dropping.
    That's a great post and something I agree with more and more. I've watched my Mam become a virtual hermit because I know she believes all this crap, my Dad's health has suffered at times due to the knock on effects and I know this has been repeated countless times across the country.
    I was only thinking to myself on Friday whilst going through the rigmarole of getting a pint in the Gerrard that this is bloody madness. What about all the youngsters who've lost their jobs? People who live away from their families? People who rely on being able to travel? As you say this is becoming a lot less about common sense and more politically motivated.

  11. #286
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    572
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    Kentish your points in posts are also well noted. In this case though we have to compare apples with apples.
    We have shut down the world for a mortality rate of 2.6% and that does not make sense. A 49% of people are asymptomatic, another 36% will suffer from mild symptoms, that is 85% of the population. A smaller sliding scale of over 68`s and every seven years after that are in danger along with immune compromised.
    The problem is underfunding of Health Services not Covid 19.
    The resources should be put into the groups who are most at risk, the rest should just be allowed to continue.
    Governments are making it up as they go along, another lockdown then what? It is a virus that will continue to infect until 65% of the population have contracted it, why not allow it to do this in the summer just gone?
    On a personal note, I have not seen my Mam in person who is 81 years old since the WCC, she usually visits Easter, Summer and Christmas.
    She has not seen her grandchild or great grand children since last Christmas. Though wanting to visit and "b''gger the consequences" her words not mine, restrictions on travel and of course medical insurance mean that cannot happen. This could go on like this for another three to five years if the reports are correct, does my Mam have that long left, so she can physically touch her family?
    This is now turning into a political game that is pushing the boundaries of human rights.
    It has to stop, presently it is fatal to 2.6% of the population and that figure is dropping.
    Given the speculation surrounding the validity of the test results and false positives and further the issues validating any illness when there are no symptoms I think it reasonable to use another measure that can't really be doubted. I would propose not to use the term Covid deaths either as it's clear that some deaths have been incorrectly attributed, how many is impossible to say.
    I'd propose we use Excess Deaths where these are the deaths above what could be expected in line with the 5 year average for example.
    This year there are 42000 excess deaths primarily driven from what we call the 1st wave, from a UK population of 62m which calculates to 0.068%. I'm no longer going to engage with the Covid debate on here however I thought it might be helpful to use a figure with some validity that's not open to argument.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #287
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Dave there is a guy running Wales called Drayford and frankly he looks ready for God himself. One poster accused me of being selfish but here we go again. Old people are dying and no it's not nice and so are those with severe underlying health conditions, some very much self inflicted.

    Young people are taking the brunt of all this. Education in tatters, they are losing the jobs, they are losing their freedom and youth. Risk is proportionate and old people being taken from care homes many with dementia to be kept alive on ventilators for weeks before passing is madness. My Mother could have been resuscitated pre COVID she was 90 and I told the care home no interventions just let her pass in peace. Apparently I am very much the exception in these cases. Selfish, that's an opinion and I take it, but I would save the young before the old. Too many young suffered in World Wars.

  13. #288
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,591
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    That's a great post and something I agree with more and more. I've watched my Mam become a virtual hermit because I know she believes all this crap, my Dad's health has suffered at times due to the knock on effects and I know this has been repeated countless times across the country.
    I was only thinking to myself on Friday whilst going through the rigmarole of getting a pint in the Gerrard that this is bloody madness. What about all the youngsters who've lost their jobs? People who live away from their families? People who rely on being able to travel? As you say this is becoming a lot less about common sense and more politically motivated.
    That's a good point, I worry what is happening to my little ones future, and he's five.. on the flip side I'm worried about my parents catching it..

    I saw it early on in lockdown, there were people literally terrified to leave their houses, because they were watching so much news, whereas those who were working throughout weren't really affected as much..

    Some of the comments above believe there is no middle ground, you can question the policies, stick to the rules, wear masks, without being a full on tin foil hat anti vaxer (I'm sure I've said this before)

    Above all else, what is annoying me more is there is absolutely nobody in government or opposition daring to at least question some of the government's decisions

  14. #289
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    Dave there is a guy running Wales called Drayford and frankly he looks ready for God himself. One poster accused me of being selfish but here we go again. Old people are dying and no it's not nice and so are those with severe underlying health conditions, some very much self inflicted.

    Young people are taking the brunt of all this. Education in tatters, they are losing the jobs, they are losing their freedom and youth. Risk is proportionate and old people being taken from care homes many with dementia to be kept alive on ventilators for weeks before passing is madness. My Mother could have been resuscitated pre COVID she was 90 and I told the care home no interventions just let her pass in peace. Apparently I am very much the exception in these cases. Selfish, that's an opinion and I take it, but I would save the young before the old. Too many young suffered in World Wars.
    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    That's a good point, I worry what is happening to my little ones future, and he's five.. on the flip side I'm worried about my parents catching it..

    I saw it early on in lockdown, there were people literally terrified to leave their houses, because they were watching so much news, whereas those who were working throughout weren't really affected as much..

    Some of the comments above believe there is no middle ground, you can question the policies, stick to the rules, wear masks, without being a full on tin foil hat anti vaxer (I'm sure I've said this before)

    Above all else, what is annoying me more is there is absolutely nobody in government or opposition daring to at least question some of the government's decisions
    Both well put but I'm going to raise you both and put something into practice that's just came in to my head, risk probability X severity. I regularly use this in work and I'm sure plenty have come across similar but it becomes hard to argue with. Green is good, Red unacceptable, and everything in between acceptable with control measures, however, when those control measures actually become part of the problem and not mitigating the risk, this would be reevaluated, so my question is, why are they actually making things worse as opposed dealing with things in a fluid and sensible manner?

    Last edited by Angry Dave; 25th October 2020 at 19:40. Reason: Brian Carney's tiny feet

  15. #290
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,591
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    my question is, why are they actually making things worse as opposed dealing with things in a fluid and sensible manner?
    No matter which way you look at it, Less Restrictions = More deaths, and vice versa.. it's about getting the balance right for the government..

    Government premierships are short, 200k deaths in the long term due to cancelled operations, missed diagnosis and a crippled economy (and subsequent deaths) will more than likely be over the next 20 years, not now, and for the next five or six governments to sort out

    You're quite right with regards to risk, the classic anology is lots die on the roads, but we don't stop driving, we do however put numerous control measures in.. I know when you say that, people come back with talk about infections

  16. #291
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    No matter which way you look at it, Less Restrictions = More deaths, and vice versa.. it's about getting the balance right for the government..

    Government premierships are short, 200k deaths in the long term due to cancelled operations, missed diagnosis and a crippled economy (and subsequent deaths) will more than likely be over the next 20 years, not now, and for the next five or six governments to sort out

    You're quite right with regards to risk, the classic anology is lots die on the roads, but we don't stop driving, we do however put numerous control measures in.. I know when you say that, people come back with talk about infections
    Ok, I can go with that but as Cyprus said it's almost all old and ill who are people dying, now I'm not for one minute saying they should be sacrificed but if someone is at risk then surely they will know that and they will do the right things with support from the government instead of a one size fits all, •••• the economy style "solution" they have in place now. They keep going on about wearing masks but I see loads not wearing them, it's either important or it isn't but if it's important then enforce it instead of blowing smoke up my arse. As far as I can see, there's a lot of posturing, bullshit and advise but very little decisive action.

  17. #292
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,130
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    Ok, I can go with that but as Cyprus said it's almost all old and ill who are people dying, now I'm not for one minute saying they should be sacrificed but if someone is at risk then surely they will know that and they will do the right things with support from the government instead of a one size fits all, •••• the economy style "solution" they have in place now. They keep going on about wearing masks but I see loads not wearing them, it's either important or it isn't but if it's important then enforce it instead of blowing smoke up my arse. As far as I can see, there's a lot of posturing, bullshit and advise but very little decisive action.
    Once the hospitals are at capacity the doctors will have to decide who to treat when presented with multiple ill patients. Again the older people will suffer because their chances of survival will be statically lower than that of a younger & fitter person.

  18. #293
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    What Dave has uploaded is used in most industries to subjectively assess risk and the potential for it to cause you harm. I am 57 and in extended remission for cancer. However I am fitter than I was at 47 and can run 5 miles and have walked up to 42.7 miles in a one off event since the op.

    If I take a dispassionate but personal view regarding Covid. The matrix would be likelihood to catch is 3 and the severity would also likely be a 3 which is a 9. So social distancing for me is my main mitigation, no external masks. Now yes I could catch COVID and die and the risk averse would say " I told you so" but in all honesty my fitness regime puts me at an equal or slightly higher risk of a snatch. My 18 year old Daughter at Carmel I would put at a likelihood at present of 4 and a severity of 1. My wife is a post lady and with no disrespect on crap money, by her own choice, I told her to pack it in, she worked all through COVID the control measures where loose to say the least and I will leave that there. She never caught it thankfully. If my Mum had survived until this year she would in the care home have been 20 possibly 25 so it's isolation and confine to barracks. If she caught it off to Whiston on a vent for x amount of time probable outcome death.

  19. #294
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tilly2006 View Post
    Once the hospitals are at capacity the doctors will have to decide who to treat when presented with multiple ill patients. Again the older people will suffer because their chances of survival will be statically lower than that of a younger & fitter person.
    Without wanting to sound mean, you're talking about old people who lived their lives, so yes, if it was a choice between my Dad who's 72 and my Niece who's 8 then I know what the right choice is, not only that, I know 100% what my Dad would choose. Of course I'd be absolutely gutted and it's a horrible thing to have to make that decision but's is it right to rob youngsters of a future to save a few older people who may only have a couple of years of ill health left to live anyway?
    The point I was trying to make was that if the efforts were towards helping the vulnerable instead of just closing everything it might be a different story. It might no also, I'm not an expert but I do know my bank account is thousands of pounds down on what it should be and that I'm fed up being told what to do and having my life dictated by a bunch of stuffed shirts in Parliment.

  20. #295
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,591
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tilly2006 View Post
    Once the hospitals are at capacity the doctors will have to decide who to treat when presented with multiple ill patients. Again the older people will suffer because their chances of survival will be statically lower than that of a younger & fitter person.
    With respect the NHS chooses who lives and dies on all sorts of treatments due to funding, meaning people have to fund operations privately, they also put DNRs on people who are too ill

    I'm not saying that's wrong, but let's not suggest the NHS don't already decide who to treat, and who not to treat

    I'll reiterate though, I'm not suggesting we just open the world again

  21. #296
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,130
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    Without wanting to sound mean, you're talking about old people who lived their lives, so yes, if it was a choice between my Dad who's 72 and my Niece who's 8 then I know what the right choice is, not only that, I know 100% what my Dad would choose. Of course I'd be absolutely gutted and it's a horrible thing to have to make that decision but's is it right to rob youngsters of a future to save a few older people who may only have a couple of years of ill health left to live anyway?
    The point I was trying to make was that if the efforts were towards helping the vulnerable instead of just closing everything it might be a different story. It might no also, I'm not an expert but I do know my bank account is thousands of pounds down on what it should be and that I'm fed up being told what to do and having my life dictated by a bunch of stuffed shirts in Parliment.
    I was only playing devil's advocate. I am with you & Paulsculthorpe all the way on this one. When you look at the long term effects of mental health that this will have as well as all the people affected from non treatment of illnesses and cancelled operations it is going to take the NHS a very long time to catch up.

    Unless a vaccine is found in the next 6 months I think waiting for herd immunity is the best way forward.

  22. #297
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I agree Tilly.

  23. #298
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,388
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    At the start and during the peak period the doctors and researchers were agreeing on lockdown policy, as time passed they started to differ almost being 50/50 for and against, that has changed again. Most people with a background in risk assessment, mathematics and data crunching are adamant this locking down is the wrong action, the doctors on the coal face will be firmly for excessive control measures because they are slaves to the numerous broken health systems.
    I understand it would have taken a brave leader to plough on with the way resulting deaths in the UK were heading, I know the figures are flawed but they are the ones we have at the moment so until yearly excess deaths are calculated we have to use them, but it now seems that front loading the deaths was the better policy.
    As with all politics it is better to blame a person not wearing a face covering, not social distancing and acting as normal using these as scapegoats to successfully divide and conquer.
    We need to get back to normal immediately with measures in place for the at risk.
    It has a mortality rate of 2.6% and for over 85% of people it is not even slightly dangerous.

  24. #299
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallaght Tiger View Post
    At the start and during the peak period the doctors and researchers were agreeing on lockdown policy, as time passed they started to differ almost being 50/50 for and against, that has changed again. Most people with a background in risk assessment, mathematics and data crunching are adamant this locking down is the wrong action, the doctors on the coal face will be firmly for excessive control measures because they are slaves to the numerous broken health systems.
    I understand it would have taken a brave leader to plough on with the way resulting deaths in the UK were heading, I know the figures are flawed but they are the ones we have at the moment so until yearly excess deaths are calculated we have to use them, but it now seems that front loading the deaths was the better policy.
    As with all politics it is better to blame a person not wearing a face covering, not social distancing and acting as normal using these as scapegoats to successfully divide and conquer.
    We need to get back to normal immediately with measures in place for the at risk.
    It has a mortality rate of 2.6% and for over 85% of people it is not even slightly dangerous.
    You're right in my opinion, most people have towed the line for long enough now and are sick to death (no pun intended) of being ragged about when there's no real proof of this being dangerous to most of us. I'm certainly confident I could fight it off, and if not well it's just my time to go. As I said previous, concentrate on protecting the most at risk and let the rest of us keep the country afloat.

  25. #300
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,388
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Dave View Post
    You're right in my opinion, most people have towed the line for long enough now and are sick to death (no pun intended) of being ragged about when there's no real proof of this being dangerous to most of us. I'm certainly confident I could fight it off, and if not well it's just my time to go. As I said previous, concentrate on protecting the most at risk and let the rest of us keep the country afloat.
    tilly, Cyprus, paulscnthorpe, Saddened & yourself have all given reasoned points of view and seen it from other perspectives as well.
    The figures at present do not stack up for these measures but the lunatics took over the asylum a long time ago, we have been allowing less than 3% of the population to change policies for the last 20 years. A quick one from my industry is we must build homes that are wheelchair accessible at a 7% extra cost that only less than 2% of the population need.
    We will not solve it just as we did not cause it but hey ho blame that man for not wearing a face covering, touching a friend or daring to sneeze outside in public.
    On a separate note I know it is for the other forum are you going to share your luck and well gathered knowledge to assist us peasants on
    1st try, mom, halftime/fulltime?
    Last edited by Tallaght Tiger; 26th October 2020 at 10:12.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •