Coronavirus outbreak

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
Or is the theory that the mere existence of higher tiers will scare the bejesus out of the population and cow us into better compliance?
I don't know what the theory is, but the practice is that they can't even agree amongst themselves (politicians and officers) what restrictions are both acceptable and effective.

I expect they'll do the same as they have on another subject. They'll agree at the eleventh hour what they think is the best for them, then tell the coronavirus and it'll just have to comply because they know best, won't it?
 

All uphill

Still rolling along
Location
Somerset
It matters very little what the rules are if those imposing them do not have the respect of the public to ensure large scale compliance. Enforcement cannot change population behaviour unless there is move to a police state.

I fear that we will have successive waves with deaths and damaged lives until the general population consistently modify their behaviour in ways that control the virus, or until natural selection and whatever immunity there may be limits the effects.
 

tom73

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
Devastating honesty from Whitty: Tier 3 is not enough. View attachment 552064
But what I don't understand - why would any of theother tiers be enough?

Surely, the implication of this policy is that all areas will progress up through the tiers to a new Tier 4 which Whitty implies?

Or is the theory that the mere existence of higher tiers will scare the bejesus out of the population and cow us into better compliance?

Beaten me to it I was about to ask who else thought how soon 2 becomes 3 and 3 becomes 4.
He maybe heading the press off at the pass. They have picked up on this and are talking about they can't exactly use it to rubbish the idea that the tier 4 areas are not in a bad way. They've been reporting and talking about often enough. They love putting egg on other faces not the other way round.
If he'd have said all the tiers may not be good enough. They'd have ran with it and they'd be shot to bit before they even got off the ground.
We most likely will find out that all the tiers have room to add extras. The government will just blame us for not playing by the rules or say local leaders want more. Whitty also has been careful to use the word slow and slow further. He's not saying it will slow it quick enough so leaves room to explain why they may need looking at again.
 

tom73

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
It matters very little what the rules are if those imposing them do not have the respect of the public to ensure large scale compliance. Enforcement cannot change population behaviour unless there is move to a police state.

I fear that we will have successive waves with deaths and damaged lives until the general population consistently modify their behaviour in ways that control the virus, or until natural selection and whatever immunity there may be limits the effects.
Either of them options are grim the lack of social science around this is deafening. The government don't look to have got even a simple understanding of the basics. Believing that the normal social political way works. Whitty will know this and that will have played into how he handled today he's always been clear and never blamed the masses for the mess. He and the rest of sage appear the only ones to have treated the public as grown up's and told it how it is. He's not into sound bites and being Mr popular he's a man of science and tell's it how it is. Even if the press don't hear the answers they want to hear.
 

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
Rule of six is still a problem it's open to too many households mixing. Thought the BMA a few days again had a better idea of no more than two households up to a max of 6 people in total. i'd have liked the government to also taken up the BMA on extending use of face coverings.
I didn't like that suggestion. I thought it was almost impossible to police and also it would encourage people to play games to still see everyone. At the moment, it's difficult enough for cycling clubs to get some people to stay in their bloody sixes and not chop and change. If they're now going to say two households, that means most "subgroups" will be two with some threes, fours and rarely more and most subgroups would have no one who feels strongly that the restrictions make enough sense to obey (which means most others comply out of respect for them), so they'd probably be reforming out of sight whenever they caught another subgroup and that would probably end up with more than six having been exposed if anyone falls ill, even though that wouldn't be classed as close contacts at the moment, but it's all probabilistic.

And the same would probably happen with every surviving social activity, so it'd probably backfire and I'm not sure what the BMA were thinking would happen. Did they think more would comply with tighter restrictions?
 

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
Restaurant reviewer joins the complaints:
"It is unclear how forcing everyone on to public transport at roughly the same time, while simultaneously slashing the profits of every hospitality outlet that has survived thus far, is helping us combat the virus, but still, I trust those in charge implicitly."
https://www.theguardian.com/food/20...-a-bit-of-genius-grace-dent-restaurant-review
 

marinyork

Resting in suspended Animation
Location
Logopolis
What you thinking it maybe called ?
We have 1m+ so tier 4 + (don't blame us local leaders asked for it) maybe ?

Probably needs a 4+.

Just checked the Liverpool restrictions and there is a public outdoor spaces exemption for groups of up to six. This among other things may be why the whitty said it's not enough as the base level isn't as different as it sounds.
 
Last edited:

roubaixtuesday

self serving virtue signaller
It appears from latest minutes that my views on the useless dithering of the govt are shared by their scientific advisers.

I can honestly say this brings me absolutely no pleasure whatsoever.

The lesson of the first wave:
Act rapidly or regret at length

The action for the second wave:
Dither at length. Regrets to follow.

It will now take many weeks of further social and economic pain, paid in unemployment and bereavement, to undo the blindingly obvious mistakes since the cretinous "Stop skiving. Save Pret. Catch Covid" message.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...roposals-from-sage-to-avert-covid-second-wave
 

tom73

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
I didn't like that suggestion. I thought it was almost impossible to police and also it would encourage people to play games to still see everyone. At the moment, it's difficult enough for cycling clubs to get some people to stay in their bloody sixes and not chop and change. If they're now going to say two households, that means most "subgroups" will be two with some threes, fours and rarely more and most subgroups would have no one who feels strongly that the restrictions make enough sense to obey (which means most others comply out of respect for them), so they'd probably be reforming out of sight whenever they caught another subgroup and that would probably end up with more than six having been exposed if anyone falls ill, even though that wouldn't be classed as close contacts at the moment, but it's all probabilistic.

And the same would probably happen with every surviving social activity, so it'd probably backfire and I'm not sure what the BMA were thinking would happen. Did they think more would comply with tighter restrictions?

I don't think the BMA are too worried about outdoor exercise. More smaller subgroups are much a better idea than a few larger groups of more households. They have more a problem with households spending hours mixing indoors. They also more likely wanted to get out the idea that what ever the rule is it's a good idea for everyone to sink social bubbles.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
Restaurant reviewer joins the complaints:
"It is unclear how forcing everyone on to public transport at roughly the same time, while simultaneously slashing the profits of every hospitality outlet that has survived thus far, is helping us combat the virus, but still, I trust those in charge implicitly."
https://www.theguardian.com/food/20...-a-bit-of-genius-grace-dent-restaurant-review
Whose forcing people onto public transport. Some have no other options when it comes to getting to work.

Again numbers allowed are restricted, 16 per carriage on local services. Buses have had their capacity cut in half.

Pubs are a place a person can choose to go to. Often using public transport to travel to and from them.
 
Top Bottom