Lockdown #2

[phil-b259]

10 minutes ago, darren chpamn said:

On the 23nd a teir 3 will have become unlocked with areas of high infection being able to move around for 5 days with the uk  we have had lockdown for a month and only now have we started to see results meaning g two more weeks we will still be higher than when we locked down for the second time . Also with the lost month of xmas shooting the towns will be busier  than they would mean easy movement of the infection yet again  , with othe religious groups  this year Look at the pictures of the mecca  pilgrimage  this year to other you will see a vast difference  

 

Shopping in itself is not a massive driver of infection - social distancing measures etc mean its relatively safe. The greatest chances of infection are in fact social gatherings - which is why hospitality venues are still under restrictions / shut for Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas. These restrictions are not going to be relaxed over Christmas.

 

You should also note that its not a case of everybody doing what they want for 5 days, the Government have made it clear that*:-

 

The exclusive ‘Christmas bubble’ can only be composed of people from no more than three households (e.g. One family from Brighton, one family from Cardiff and one family from Glasgow)

 

People can only be in one Christmas bubble (i.e. ONLY those 3 families can meet together)

 

People cannot change your Christmas bubble (i.e. The family from Brighton / Cardiff / Edinburgh cannot meet up with ANYONE ELSE over Christmas!)

 

People can only meet as a Christmas bubble in private homes or in your garden, places of worship, or public outdoor spaces

 

People cannot meet someone in a private dwelling who is not part of your household or Christmas bubble (i.e. the Brighton family cannot also have their best friends from Hove round)

 

All very far from the 'free for all' you are implying.

 

*https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-a-christmas-bubble-with-friends-and-family/making-a-christmas-bubble-with-friends-and-family

 

 

As for as religious equality goes - if you are really that bothered I dare you to write to the Sun, Mirror, Times, Telegraph, Mail, Guardian, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Pope telling everyone they should sacrifice Christmas for religious equality and see how well that goes down!

 

In a democracy Governments can only exist because they carry the support of the electorate. Banning Christmas is pretty much going to guarantee mass protests, riots, civil disobedience culminating in the fall of the Government in favour of one that actually tries to reflect the desires of the people.

 

You quote the example of the Haj pilgrimage - that had a number of natural advantages when it comes to suppressing it including the fact that to get to Saudi Arabia you need to fly and there weren't exactly many flights during the time the pilgrimage is supposed to happen. Furthermore Saudi Arabia is effectively an absolute monarchy with a well developed and oppressive security regime that has no hesitation in enforcing what the ruler wants and he didn't want Covid running wild in the Kingdom. Again Saudi Arabia's neighbours are mostly authoritarian regimes with plenty of methods available to prevent people from travelling which do not exist in true democracies. Finally there is the little matter that crossing miles of dessert to avoid closed border crossings is not exactly easy.

 

 

 

 

[darren chpamn]

3 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Shopping in itself is not a massive driver of infection - social distancing measures etc mean its relatively safe. The greatest chances of infection are in fact social gatherings - which is why hospitality venues are still under restrictions / shut for Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas. These restrictions are not going to be relaxed over Christmas.

Funny that I work I retail wear a mask and clean my hands not been anywear elsewhere but work to home and caught it my boss  was exactly  the same when she caught in march

   my local Pub a member of staff have it not one pub user caught it 

At the start of this most people wore a mask I've watched the numbers wearing  get lower and lower  

Also you cant control what people touch with in a retail setting 

 

[Nearholmer]

Darren,

 

People need some relief in the middle of winter, and have done since people and northern winters came together, that's why every society in these latitudes has some sort of "blow out" around the turning of the year.

 

Its had various forms of religious trappings put on it, from the magico-pagan to the late-arriving-Christian, and now the worship of Coca-Cola and consumerism, but none of that is at the core. The core is that it is dark all the time, cold most of it, and people need something life-enhancing to prevent them becoming overwhelmingly depressed. They need light, warmth, friends, family (the ones they get on with anyway), and to forget their troubles for a few days.

 

And they will take it, whether legislators permit or not, as was well-proven during The Commonwealth, when an attempt was made to damp it down.

 

So, HMG has a choice: try to engineer us to a point where we get some sort of christmas without killing too many of us in the process; or, attempt tight suppression, and get anarchy and a lot more deaths.

 

Kevin

 

 

[darren chpamn]

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The exclusive ‘Christmas bubble’ can only be composed of people from no more than three households (e.g. One family from Brighton, one family from Cardiff and one family from Glasgow)

 

People can only be in one Christmas bubble (i.e. ONLY those 3 families can meet together)

 

People cannot change your Christmas bubble (i.e. The family from Brighton / Cardiff / Edinburgh cannot meet up with ANYONE ELSE over Christmas!)

 

People can only meet as a Christmas bubble in private homes or in your garden, places of worship, or public outdoor spaces

 

People cannot meet someone in a private dwelling who is not part of your household or Christmas bubble (i.e. the Brighton family cannot also have their best friends from Hove 

I know this is ment to happen but if a person from a high infection  area travels the risk of spreading the virus is more  I just this it's a joke   

 

[darren chpamn]

3 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

People need some relief in the middle of winter, and have done since people and northern winters came together, that's why every society in these latitudes has some sort of "blow out" around the turning of the year.

 

Its had various forms of religious trappings put on it, from the magico-pagan to the late-arriving-Christian, and now the worship of Coca-Cola and consumerism, but none of that is at the core. The core is that it is dark all the time, cold most of it, and people need something life-enhancing to prevent them becoming overwhelmingly depressed. They need light, warmth, friends, family (the ones they get on with anyway), and to forget their troubles for a few days.

 

And they will take it, whether legislators permit or not, as was well-proven during The Commonwealth, when an attempt was made to damp it down.

 

So, HMG has a choice: try to engineer us to a point where we get some sort of christmas without killing too many of us in the process; or, attempt tight suppression, and get anarchy and a lot more deaths.

 

I do get what you are saying and I would love to see my children and rest of my family  over xmas  but they understand  my choice  and are doing the same  for the greater good , we as people have no self control  look at some of the scenes  while we have been in lockdown  beaches rammed  full of people no social  distancing  pubs full with no attempt  of socail distancing  if we give people a inch they will all ways take a mile  maybe because I've had this awful virus and seen the effects to not just me but my wife and 78 year old  mum I see things differently 

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, darren chpamn said:

I know this is ment to happen but if a person from a high infection  area travels the risk of spreading the virus is more  I just this it's a joke   

 

 

 

 

And.

 

Maybe we should ban anyone from going out at all and give them all food parcels by people in Hazmat suits. That would effectively eliminate pretty much all risk of catching Covid and while it might suit you it is impractical.

 

Every activity caries a risk - the name of the game is minimising that risk as far as is practicable.

 

As Nearholner has explained to you people are going to celebrate this year whether you like it or not! Sitting in your ivory tower saying they shouldn't makes sod all difference to reality.

 

HM Government therefore have to come up with a practical solution which minimises the risks but also stands half a chance of being obeyed by the public. Yes there is a risk that the virus may be transported across the country (which is why Nicola Sturgeon is urging people not to visit relatives unless they really have to) but that risk is manageable and the Tier levels adjusted in the weeks after Christmas accordingly.

 

[woodenhead]

I just realised I touched someone other than my wife today - the first time since March.

 

Was involved in a small shunt in the car, not my fault, the other driver and I shook hands as there had been a little bit of argy bargy from the shock of being rear ended.  Didn't even consider covid, that said I did use anti-bac when I entered the shop, not because I had shook hands but because I had had my hands all over the rear bumper on my car.

 

It's only now I am reading this I've realised that I was in physical contact.  There was a chap in Sainsburys, worse for wear would be a fair way to describe him, mask under his nose right up in the face of the member of staff.  He wasn't arguing just asking where the Quality Street are and then they bumped elbows.  In that circumstance I was concerned about the close proximity of the two people.  What does that say about me?  In an RTA I only thought about the incident, but once in a normal environment with everyone in masks I became fearful.

[phil-b259]

6 minutes ago, darren chpamn said:

I do get what you are saying and I would love to see my children and rest of my family  over xmas  but they understand  my choice  and are doing the same  for the greater good , we as people have no self control  look at some of the scenes  while we have been in lockdown  beaches rammed  full of people no social  distancing  pubs full with no attempt  of socail distancing  if we give people a inch they will all ways take a mile  maybe because I've had this awful virus and seen the effects to not just me but my wife and 78 year old  mum I see things differently 

 

But you are not going to get them to suddenly display self control by banning Christmas!

 

Naturally having had the virus you see things differently - but the bulk of the population have not yet experienced and increasingly don't fear getting it!

 

As such they are much less inclined to 'do the right thing', particularly during the most depressing months in the northern hemisphere.

 

Again this should not come as a surprise. Those whose business it is to study human behaviours did warn back in March that there was only so much Lockdown / restrictions people could tolerate and sooner or later people would begin to rise up against them. Had the virus emerged onto the world stage during the summer then you may well have found folk more receptive to restrictive ideas as Christmas approaches.

[Nearholmer]

Darren

 

I share your worries about the likelihood of a collective outbreak of stupidity, especially when it comes to worshipping consumerism by flocking to the shops.

 

FWIW, we (my good lady, self, children, BiL, SiL, their children, and Granny) have all agreed not to go near any shops, and to decide closer to christmas itself whether we all think we've limited our contacts enough that we can afford to gather as a bubble of three families for christmas dinner. Son (senior school) and BiL (works at university) are probably our biggest risk factors. If we think the risk too high, we won't this year.

 

And, I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few families are going through similar thought processes.

 

Of course, some won't be!

 

Kevin

 

 

[hayfield]

26 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Darren

 

I share your worries about the likelihood of a collective outbreak of stupidity, especially when it comes to worshipping consumerism by flocking to the shops.

 

FWIW, we (my good lady, self, children, BiL, SiL, their children, and Granny) have all agreed not to go near any shops, and to decide closer to christmas itself whether we all think we've limited our contacts enough that we can afford to gather as a bubble of three families for christmas dinner. Son (senior school) and BiL (works at university) are probably our biggest risk factors. If we think the risk too high, we won't this year.

 

And, I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few families are going through similar thought processes.

 

Of course, some won't be!

 

Kevin

 

 

 

If you actually work out that if you are in one bubble all 3 families cannot be in another, if you go by the rules most will have a very limited number of contacts.

 

However there is a large number of folk who at the moment flout the rules, (we have one family with two young adults who are regularly visited by friends in the street) and I guess many will carry on regardless whatever is put in place. As they say its their human right 

Edited November 27, 2020 by hayfield

[Nearholmer]

14 minutes ago, hayfield said:

if you are in one buggle all 3 families

 

We hadn't considered the buggle option; we've been focused on a bubble thus far. ;-)

 

Which prompts another random thought: the word "bubble" is an overly reassuring term IMO.

 

It sounds all nice and cosy and protected. What it actually means is that if one person in that group gets the bug, maybe from a random source while at the supermarket, it is a near certainty that everyone else in the group will also get it. Which isn't so cosy, and needs to be thought about when 'bubbling' with the very people who you might rely on for help, to leave shopping or medicine outside the front door, in a crisis, which they won't be able to do because they'll have to isolate, and might themselves be sick and in need of your help.

 

As I said, the risk issue for us is our son, at senior school, and BiL, who works at a uni. Both school and uni operate pretty strict covid controls, but each of them has a far bigger "contact list" than the rest of us put together, and both will be at school/uni until 18th December. 

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Nearholmer

[john new]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

 

If you actually work out that if you are in one buggle all 3 families cannot be in another, if you go by the rules most will have a very limited number of contacts.

 

However there is a large number of folk who at the moment flout the rules, (we have one family with two young adults who are regularly visited by friends in the street) and I guess many will carry on regardless whatever is put in place. As they say its their human right 

We were already hovering on cancelling our Xmas trip home (300 miles each way) as it seemed a big and avoidable risk but the three households rule finally knocked it on the head for definite. If we went we would be staying with my mother and then have a four household group unless one or other married daughter & family were to be dropped off the list. Obviously unacceptable as how can you choose which child and set of grandchildren to shun - and even if the limit had been four my wife would then not have been able to see her sister. The anomaly is I could see mine as she is part of mother’s existing domestic support bubble, this defined as one household.
 

Of my two brothers in law one is from a huge family, he can’t even meet all his siblings within the rules; and if he meets with his own two children/partners/grandchild he can’t see any of his brothers and sisters. With the other B-i-l if he meets with both his brother and his sister he can’t see either of his children and their families.

 

I doubt there will be the anticipated compliance in many instances but perhaps the government allowed for that by making it a five day break and excluding N Year.

 

I hope people know how to draw their Christmas Venn diagrams!

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by john new
Typo corrected

[The Stationmaster]

Something which has to be allowed for in this sort of rules or guidance is that there will be a proportion of those to whom such things apply who will ignore what they are supposed to do,.  I suspect that advice to Govt is sufficiently aware of that to make allowance for it in whatever rules etc are put in place.  But I do wonder if those setting the rules also make allowance for people who cannot be bothered to read those rules or if they do read the rules simply don't understand them?

 

It is for example very clear that since the end of Lockdown 1 significant numbers of people don't realise that social distancing still applies and that the distance is 2 metres outdoors or if they do know that then they don't know how far 2 metres actually is.  On my irregular walks into the town - usually to visit the GP surgery and occasionally linking that with a visit to WHS and/or Waitrose - I have noted that the non-observance of social distancing can be as good as only 20% non-compliance but is more often in the region of 30 - 40% non-compliance and that the non-compliance age group mix is fairly broad.

 

Similarly while here we are in no way comparable with, say,  the West of England as a holiday or leisure break area we do have noticeable numbers of visitors when the weather is good and it has been very noticeable that they don't think the rules apply to them on a day out or when on holiday (a syndrome also observed elsewhere).  

 

So against that sort of background the Christmas relaxation - although in logical terms somewhat barmy - probably makes a degree of sense.  Some people will observe the three group bubble, some people will ignore it, and some people will be far more careful and not invite non-residents into their home.   In steering its course twixt Scylla and Charybdis I suspect the more sensible element of those involved in decision making will have weighed up that situation as well as the opposite one of making no allowance at all for something additional.   And for all we know they might even have looked at comparative expected outcomes of various levels of restriction as part of their decision process.   The only thing we can be sure of is that whatever they do somebody will say it is wrong and that it's either too harsh ('authoritarian' seems to be the term now in vogue) or far too lax and numerous extra deaths will result.

[Pete the Elaner]

It seems many fail to understand that the stricter we are with ourselves, the sooner the virus will be more under control then we can get on with a routine which although not ideal, will be more acceptable.

 

I am still stunned & disgusted by the number of people who claim the restrictions are a result of the government trying to rule us like a dictatorship.

You can prove their point wrong as soundly as you like but they refuse to listen.

[hayfield]

9 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

It seems many fail to understand that the stricter we are with ourselves, the sooner the virus will be more under control then we can get on with a routine which although not ideal, will be more acceptable.

 

I am still stunned & disgusted by the number of people who claim the restrictions are a result of the government trying to rule us like a dictatorship.

You can prove their point wrong as soundly as you like but they refuse to listen.

 

You mean the potential Darwin award applicants

[Pete the Elaner]

1 minute ago, hayfield said:

 

You mean the potential Darwin award applicants

 

They would probably think one of those is a honour.

[Welchester]

Just to clear up a point made earlier in the thread, from 2 December places of worship will be able to open in all three tiers.

[Bernard Lamb]

In The Times today there is an article by Michael Gove giving the reasoning behind the decisions taken by the government regarding the on-going situation. Now it is not often that I agree with him, but I found the article contained a lot of well thought out comments. Basically there is very little choice over the main issues and very little wriggle room. The big fear is that if the NHS is overwhelmed then the damage to the economy will be far greater than any enforced business closures .

Bernard

[phil-b259]

43 minutes ago, Welchester said:

Just to clear up a point made earlier in the thread, from 2 December places of worship will be able to open in all three tiers.

 

But not necessarily for regular services as we know them due to logistical problems in keeping each family grouping 2m away from each other.

 

That seems to be the nub of things for many of those complaining - they want to be able to hold church services as normal.

[APOLLO]

Places of worship for me used to be Springs Branch, Holbeck, Kingmoor, Finsbury Park, Crewe, Doncaster and Old Oak Common - I'm a man of many "faiths"  - I never got in "The Devils Lair" though - (Gateshead   !!!!!!).

 

Our Christmas is nearly organised. My sister aged 75 is has, sadly but correctly decided upon staying on her own in Kings Lynn at Xmas and hopes to visit next Easter (Covid / vacinations etc permitting) - so it will be just Wife, self & three kids, and my brother who lives on his own locally. We will make the best of it we can.

 

Hands, space, face will be observed where dictated without question. We have agreed NO Xmas shopping unless online - except for food and drink and it will be shopping for meat / veg (perishables) only on the week before.

 

Anyway, a bit early but here goes -------------

 

In the 12th tier at Christmas my true love gave to me.....

 

Eleven ministers, lying

Ten businesses an hour going / gone bust

Nine pm you should all be tucked up in bed

Eight  pm """All clap our hands"""

Seven million on the dole

Six O'clock news to cheer you up (not)

Five Trillion £ in debt (and rising)

Four Pubs a day  """closing for good"""

Three vaccines awaiting

Two hundred pound fine for visiting your Gran

And a fat blond oaf in a Nut Nuts tree

 

Brit15

 

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2020 by APOLLO
typo

[teaky]

5 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

But not necessarily for regular services as we know them due to logistical problems in keeping each family grouping 2m away from each other.

 

That seems to be the nub of things for many of those complaining - they want to be able to hold church services as normal.

But why isn't it 3m or more due to the increased risk caused by singing?  Or is that suppressed by mask wearing?

[The Stationmaster]

52 minutes ago, Welchester said:

Just to clear up a point made earlier in the thread, from 2 December places of worship will be able to open in all three tiers.

Albeit wit some differences in personal restriction between Tier 1 and Tiers 2 & 3.   Yet agaIn I do wonder how people will avoid socialising etc at a place of worship and will those in Tier 1 areas really stick to the 'rule of 6' which is allowed in that Tier?   But it comes back to the sort of balancing act in the rules I mentioned above which presumably been taken into account here too.

 

Like Apollo we will (as akways actually) b einmmediate family only at Christmas which is no different from every day anyway.  But largely online shopping only, no parcels will be sent to the various folk we usually send them to and Mrs Stationmaster will not be entering the local Post Office but will buy stamps during her shopping at Tesco.  Any incoming parcels will be dealt with in the way I have been dealing with them since early March - either quarantined for three days or opened very carefully while wearing rubber gloves and the gloves not touching the contents (I do the same with all arriving post and deliveries and again have done that since March although there have been no covid infections among our local Post staff).  We'e re also similarly careful with shopping

[boxbrownie]

15 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

With people being encouraged to meet grandparents outdoors during the festive season we will probably see more death from hypothermia than covid. I live by the Pennines not Bondi Beach ffs.

When we first heard about the lifting of restrictions over the Christmas period I fully expected a full information release on TV and press about if your going to travel and mix with family each “bubble” will need to isolate for 10/14 days before travelling, I expected this partly because of the early release of students from Universities before the period, but nothing has materialised, just “OK everyone off you go!” which really doesn’t bode well for the new year.

[hayfield]

3 minutes ago, teaky said:

But why isn't it 3m or more due to the increased risk caused by singing?  Or is that suppressed by mask wearing?

 

Singing is not allowed indoors !!!

 

OK to sing outdoors whilst social distancing has to be observed

 

Some intellectuals speculate indoor singing does not increase risk, most disagree. Outdoors the virus dissipates in the open air.

 

Certainly the C of E adheres to the rules, sadly some of the smaller sects fail to comply with the rules as shown in various tv reports. I have also heard some of the nonconformist groups bending the rules a bit

[hayfield]

2 minutes ago, boxbrownie said:

When we first heard about the lifting of restrictions over the Christmas period I fully expected a full information release on TV and press about if your going to travel and mix with family each “bubble” will need to isolate for 10/14 days before travelling, I expected this partly because of the early release of students from Universities before the period, but nothing has materialised, just “OK everyone off you go!” which really doesn’t bode well for the new year.

 

I think most responsible folk will do, but then there is a large group who will ignore the rules

 

Should isolate after as well just in case