WHEN'S IT ALL GONNA OPEN??

[Higgs]

Just now, frangar said:

You can tell that's from a bunch of academics who have never had to earn a living in the real world...or indeed exist outside of an education bubble......its a good recipe for starting mass civil unrest and the breakdown of society though.....

 

I think reality and social needs will burst that academic bubble. There already has been a certain amount of control gained through the measures currently operating. Coping will be the order of the day, but the single minded focus on the virus will not prevail to the exclusion of all forms of normality. 

 

 

[frangar]

Just now, Tonka said:

If people go back to work too early what message does that send to the families of the 20,000 people that have died. People need to stop being selfish. We should go back when it is safe.

Whats safe though??....should we wait for a vaccine that might never arrive or not be 100% when it does?......who is going to fund the country while all business is closed down?...whos going to make the products we require as a society?.....should we be looking for a cave to live in now before the rush starts?

[mrsmelly]

1 minute ago, Tonka said:

If people go back to work too early what message does that send to the families of the 20,000 people that have died. People need to stop being selfish. We should go back when it is safe.

Easily said. No one for sure knows how it will pan out. The government is not only responsible for health matters they also realise that if 100k dies the remaining over 67 million still need to survive. Every day of this shutdown is bankrupting and worse more and more people. Burying heads in the sand and pretending its only about health isnt realistic. Whats the point of having total lockdown and 67 million people ending up living like Oilver twist. Some middle ground will have to be adopted.

[Movin' on]

9 minutes ago, Tonka said:

If people go back to work too early what message does that send to the families of the 20,000 people that have died. People need to stop being selfish. We should go back when it is safe.

If we wait until its truly safe (2021?) then there will be nothing left to go back to - nice sentiment but the balance is where the dilemma lies for all of us - e.g. cancer patients?

[Higgs]

11 minutes ago, Tonka said:

If people go back to work too early what message does that send to the families of the 20,000 people that have died. People need to stop being selfish. We should go back when it is safe.

 

People are trying very hard not to be selfish. If you take that to a logical end, though, you wouldn't force people to serve as medics and care for those infected, for fear of themselves becoming infected. You will not be able to eliminate all risks. So, careful reintroduction of some normality will happen. 

 

 

[roland elsdon]

Not until non essential travel, ie pleasure is once again allowed.

Thats what pleasure boating is, and why coal boats can still move and residentials still go for services.

As to the timing, the govt will bow to the inevitable. However crt may need time to look at some aspects.

[restlessnomad]

1 hour ago, nbfiresprite said:

Come home to a warm fire, buy a cottage in Wales

Just out of curiosity I checked house price in wales... there is one near the canal for £150k.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-78149167.html

 

all I need is to win a small lottery...

[Movin' on]

6 minutes ago, roland elsdon said:

Not until non essential travel, ie pleasure is once again allowed.

Thats what pleasure boating is, and why coal boats can still move and residentials still go for services.

As to the timing, the govt will bow to the inevitable. However crt may need time to look at some aspects.

If we leave it to CRT we will never go back - no maintenance expenditure for a year!

[john6767]

1 minute ago, restlessnomad said:

Just out of curiosity I checked house price in wales... there is one near the canal for £150k.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-78149167.html

 

all I need is to win a small lottery...

Just right as a second home, oh hold on.....

[Movin' on]

1 minute ago, john6767 said:

Just right as a second home, oh hold on.....

Thats probably what it is/was as I think it was for sale a couple of years ago needing work

[restlessnomad]

1 minute ago, john6767 said:

Just right as a second home, oh hold on.....

what do people do with second home when not using? keep it locked? 

[Hudds Lad]

14 minutes ago, restlessnomad said:

Just out of curiosity I checked house price in wales... there is one near the canal for £150k.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-78149167.html

 

all I need is to win a small lottery...

that's a great spot to sit at the bottom of the garden and watch virgin helmspersons bounce off the narrow choke point on that stretch, also just in earshot of the local postie colourfully offering words of advice to those that don't immediately close the lift bridge

[nbfiresprite]

1 hour ago, restlessnomad said:

Just out of curiosity I checked house price in wales... there is one near the canal for £150k.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-78149167.html

 

all I need is to win a small lottery...

'Come home to a real fire, buy a cottage in Wales'. The famous sketch from Not the Nine O'Clock news

Edited April 28, 2020 by nbfiresprite

[Richard10002]

3 hours ago, mayalld said:

but equally we cannot go forever without hair cuts.

I can, but there will come a day when we have to hold our dog down and enforce its' haircut - it wont be a pretty sight, (or site  ).

[peterboat]

3 hours ago, frangar said:

Whats safe though??....should we wait for a vaccine that might never arrive or not be 100% when it does?......who is going to fund the country while all business is closed down?...whos going to make the products we require as a society?.....should we be looking for a cave to live in now before the rush starts?

We already have those caves some are larger than others though ?

[peterboat]

3 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Easily said. No one for sure knows how it will pan out. The government is not only responsible for health matters they also realise that if 100k dies the remaining over 67 million still need to survive. Every day of this shutdown is bankrupting and worse more and more people. Burying heads in the sand and pretending its only about health isnt realistic. Whats the point of having total lockdown and 67 million people ending up living like Oilver twist. Some middle ground will have to be adopted.

What worries me is that they have made a big effort for this virus, I would think we have lost over 50k already, what happens if when lockdown is relaxed the infection and death rate go up quickly? another round of lockdown would not go down well

[rustynewbery]

Firstly, respect to all those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in fighting COVD-19 and to all the key people maintaining like in these trying times.

 

Whenever these necessary restrictions are relaxed, consider that the following canals have been closed due to - wait for it - water shortage. Leeds & Liverpool, Macclesfield, Peak Forest.  Lock flights to be locked, gates ashed up to prevent leakage [horse, stable, door?]and gear removed to prevent vandalism.

 

Ye gods, after the biblical storms and downpours over autumn, winter and early spring, 5 weeks of sunshine and little rain have now cut the available boating area - again.  The Reservoir Levels are indicative of some areas which are leaking water alarmingly, but what's new.  To say that Toddbrook is the cause of the Peak and Macc closures beggars belief.  Rather than speak in plain language, the hydrology unit in Hatton are using Babblespeak to describe the situation. SNAFU

 

I have a friend who lives on board and he suggests an agenda that most of the system will be reduced to an 18" linear ditch to be accessed by walkers, runners, cyclists all in the name of wellbeing.  It ticks the box "better by water".  If you have a boat on the above canals, you should demand a rolling extension of your licence.

 

[mayalld]

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

If people go back to work too early what message does that send to the families of the 20,000 people that have died. People need to stop being selfish. We should go back when it is safe.

The trouble with this is that this is a very simplistic view of the situation.

 

"If we all stay in lockdown for longer, less people will die". I can see the appeal of that being true, because it makes the decisions so much easier.

 

The trouble is that it isn't true. Lockdown reduces deaths largely because it reduces the number who have the virus at one time, such that everybody can receive treatment. Consequently nobody dies for want of treatment. Unless you can maintain lockdown until there is a vaccine or effective medication (which doesn't seem likely) a lockdown of excessive severity doesn't help at all.

 

So, at all times, they need to maintain things so that the NHS can cope. No more, no less.

 

The reason for that is that maintaining a lockdown CAUSES other deaths;

 

• Suicides
• People not diagnosed with cancer in time
• People whose life prolonging cancer treatment is postponed.
• People whose economic circumstances are badly affected and become poorer, and whose lifespan is reduced.
• Children whose education is affected, and who will be at a disadvantage through life and become poorer.

Lockdown will need to be eased soon, otherwise the cure may kill more people than it saves.

[churchward]

4 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Easily said. No one for sure knows how it will pan out. The government is not only responsible for health matters they also realise that if 100k dies the remaining over 67 million still need to survive. Every day of this shutdown is bankrupting and worse more and more people. Burying heads in the sand and pretending its only about health isnt realistic. Whats the point of having total lockdown and 67 million people ending up living like Oilver twist. Some middle ground will have to be adopted.

No it is not all about health for sure and people need to earn a living but it is also true to say that it is not only about economics either.  It id no good every body returning to how it was prior to the pandemic and having a sick workforce and an over loaded NHS because of it.  If that happened the economic impact could be worse than us staying at home.  A middle ground is needed indeed.

 

It is a very fine tight-rope to walk and I suspect very difficult to get right. It is far easier to announce lockdown than get out of it.  The UK in coming out of the lockdown does have the advantage at this stage of being able to watch what happens elsewhere in Europe in particular but around the world too.

[mrsmelly]

1 minute ago, churchward said:

No it is not all about health for sure and people need to earn a living but it is also true to say that it is not only about economics either.  It id no good every body returning to how it was prior to the pandemic and having a sick workforce and an over loaded NHS because of it.  If that happened the economic impact could be worse than us staying at home.  A middle ground is needed indeed.

 

It is a very fine tight-rope to walk and I suspect very difficult to get right. It is far easier to announce lockdown than get out of it.  The UK in coming out of the lockdown does have the advantage at this stage of being able to watch what happens elsewhere in Europe in particular but around the world too.

Yes agreed. The media constantly asking when and how makes them look stupid. This is an unfolding event and decisions are made on the hoof, no one knows in advance what to do but try as it moves along. Who would want to be running any country at the moment!!

Of course at the end billions will be made by the kind of solicitor taking cases whilst sat drinking coffee in their office with the great advantage of hindsight.

[Dr Bob]

1 minute ago, churchward said:

 

 

  The UK in coming out of the lockdown does have the advantage at this stage of being able to watch what happens elsewhere in Europe in particular but around the world too.

Absolutely.

China and SK are a month ahead of us so we can see if there are any 2ndry peaks......but we need then to adopt the measures they are taking.

Why are we not measuring peoples temperatures? In China, SK and Singapore, they are (and have been for 2 months) measuring your temperature before alowing you into a building (office blocks etc). In Singapore, that has helped  them to stop the virus in the majority of the community (confined now to the 'slave labour' dormitories).

[john6767]

2 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Absolutely.

China and SK are a month ahead of us so we can see if there are any 2ndry peaks......but we need then to adopt the measures they are taking.

Why are we not measuring peoples temperatures? In China, SK and Singapore, they are (and have been for 2 months) measuring your temperature before alowing you into a building (office blocks etc). In Singapore, that has helped  them to stop the virus in the majority of the community (confined now to the 'slave labour' dormitories).

On the temperature measuring, it is because we believe we are a grown up society, and if you have a temperature you will not be out, but will be a home self isolating.  So far the government has tried to do this by consent with the public’s support, has it worked or not I guess we don’t know,, but the other alternative you trust no one and enforce things as they have in other countries.

[peterboat]

39 minutes ago, mayalld said:

The trouble with this is that this is a very simplistic view of the situation.

 

"If we all stay in lockdown for longer, less people will die". I can see the appeal of that being true, because it makes the decisions so much easier.

 

The trouble is that it isn't true. Lockdown reduces deaths largely because it reduces the number who have the virus at one time, such that everybody can receive treatment. Consequently nobody dies for want of treatment. Unless you can maintain lockdown until there is a vaccine or effective medication (which doesn't seem likely) a lockdown of excessive severity doesn't help at all.

 

So, at all times, they need to maintain things so that the NHS can cope. No more, no less.

 

The reason for that is that maintaining a lockdown CAUSES other deaths;

 

• Suicides
• People not diagnosed with cancer in time
• People whose life prolonging cancer treatment is postponed.
• People whose economic circumstances are badly affected and become poorer, and whose lifespan is reduced.
• Children whose education is affected, and who will be at a disadvantage through life and become poorer.

Lockdown will need to be eased soon, otherwise the cure may kill more people than it saves.

Dave they have just added the last 14 days deaths in nursing homes to the total its over 4300 and in the last 5 days the figures are rising the most I think this might apply the brakes to end of lockdown for a while

[mayalld]

23 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Yes agreed. The media constantly asking when and how makes them look stupid. This is an unfolding event and decisions are made on the hoof, no one knows in advance what to do but try as it moves along. Who would want to be running any country at the moment!!

Of course at the end billions will be made by the kind of solicitor taking cases whilst sat drinking coffee in their office with the great advantage of hindsight.

The trouble is that there is a plan.

 

That plan is not being shared for a number of reasons;

1. If they share the plan people will change behaviours ahead of the scheduled dates.
2. The timing of each step of the plan isn't fixed in stone, only what the steps are.
3. If they publish anything, then make a change the media will scream blue murder.

 

[Alan de Enfield]

One of the regular unanswered questions is regarding "once the 5 criteria have been met what is the process and timing for lifting the restrictions?"

 

I'd suggest it's a fair question or are 'they going to wait until the criteria and then think what do we do now ?'

 

Surely any business from the one-man band to the business of running a country undertakes planning and having 'things' in place to respond to business problems.

 

They could look at various options and file them away, just bringing out the scenario closest to the situation and introduced almost immediately.

 

Lets say (just as an example) that there have been no infections, no hospitalisations no deaths of anyone under 40 for 4 weeks.

1) All under 40' can go back to work

2) All kids can go back to school / college (taught by only under 40's)

3) All shops, recreational facilities etc can open (to under 40's)

 

I have no idea how it could be implemented, monitored or enforced (its above my paygrade), but surely some skilled business men, scientists and politicians could brain-storm potential scenarios and methods of implementation.

 

It is the sort of thing, that as a business we did every year, from disaster planning, to falling sales, to petrol shortages to raw material shortages, every possible scenario was looked at (with nothing off limits) and discussed with the most likely being written up in depth and the remainder kept in the 'appendix'.

Edited April 28, 2020 by Alan de Enfield