Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer

[jamesg46]

If you trade using servants do you manage your servants and take responsibility for your p&l or do you blame the servants. I bet the pm would blame his servants but in reality he commissioned them and is ultimately responsible. Apparently he's our leader... well I'll lead my own destiny, I don’t care to be part of a political tug of war & I'll be entirely selfish in my decisions, we live in a world full of self-righteous individuals who couldn't care less about my opinions, wealth or health... conflicting interests for self serving gain. The few good, kind & honest people are few and far between, most people say one thing to a camera while spending their personal life hiding their sins from that same thing. Us minions are nothing more than sheaple or in this case, lambs to the slaughter house... that is of course if its open.

Deciding who's to handle a problem is handling it.

So no football teams have bad players, they just have bad managers ... no wait, the manager is not to blame it must be a Board of Directors. No, sorry wrong again, it must be the owner's fault ... yes that's it, when the striker missed that goal opportunity we should all blame the club's owner. And there must be a lot of very pissed off goalkeepers. Why are they not given the credit for 'an assist' whenever a goal is scored in a match after a goal-kick had been taken earlier. I mean, if the goalkeeper had not taken the kick the way they did in the first minute the whole of the rest of the game would have been different and that goal in the 90th minute would not have been scored!

For any leader to be able to make every decision he would need to be as knowledgeable as all the experts of all the influences of the situation. I've never heard of anyone who has all those skills at a superior level.

Anyway it never ceases to amaze me why we ever have any crises with all these unqualified, inexperienced 'experts' within our population. I am in complete awe of them. They haven't had any contact with the qualified, experienced experts let alone attended any meeting with them. They haven't had the conflicting inputs put to them by those qualified experts and yet they have the intelligence to know that the decisions that were made in real time based on the facts at the time were wrong and they can prove the decisions were wrong even though they still don't know what the expert opinions were at the time because hindsight proves it.

If these unqualified, inexperienced experts really want to save the country maybe they should give Boris a Servant that can do in real time that what it should have done 1 minute before!

I dont think asking questions or criticism is a claim of expertise either. If we can't criticise or question/discuss between ourselves, those that chose to run for the highest positions then I can only presume we are heading for a Chinese or North Korea style of Goverment.

[firlandsfarm]

I dont think asking questions or criticism is a claim of expertise either. If we can't criticise or question/discuss between ourselves, those that chose to run for the highest positions then I can only presume we are heading for a Chinese or North Korea style of Goverment.

Of course I agree with discussion ... that is what I did, I discussed yours and Derek's response to my original comment.

[Derek27]

For any leader to be able to make every decision he would need to be as knowledgeable as all the experts of all the influences of the situation. I've never heard of anyone who has all those skills at a superior level.

How much knowledge and expertise do you need to realise that five days of free virus-spreading isn't a good idea?

[Naffman]

Remember when being fit and healthy reduced your chances of being affected by covid - I wonder how many who are scared shitless have actually changed their lifestyle, I could almost guarantee the obesity rate has gone up since the beginning of 2020

[firlandsfarm]

For any leader to be able to make every decision he would need to be as knowledgeable as all the experts of all the influences of the situation. I've never heard of anyone who has all those skills at a superior level.

How much knowledge and expertise do you need to realise that five days of free virus-spreading isn't a good idea?

I can't say and that's my point. I don't have the input from the experts telling me what the downside would be if it hadn't been offered. When that decision was made it may have been that he was advised that the demoralising effect of cancelling Christmas would have been worse than the consequences of having Christmas (and remember, it wasn't in those 5 days that you could go and mix with 1,000 people at a rave, you were still expected to use your common sense!). But since that advice was received the downsides of having Christmas out weighed the advantage of having so ... therefore the decision was altered. The problem is Boris and his advisers can't see into the future as far as the lay experts can see into the past.

You can only lockdown with the public's permission and agreement. If the public didn't agree to being locked down over Christmas then it wouldn't happen regardless of what the Government advised. For all we know it could have been a tactic ... show you are on their side, win their support and then unfortunately because it's worse than expected we really do have to lock Christmas down, sorry folks, with Joe Public saying ... " well at least he tried, it must be serious for him to change his mind after all the support he gave for having Christmas". Maybe instead of suggesting he has the intelligence of a shrimp (no offence intended towards shrimps ) we should be thinking ... "wow, what a master stroke, by doing it as he has Christmas was cancelled and we quietly accepted it."!

[firlandsfarm]

Remember when being fit and healthy reduced your chances of being affected by covid - I wonder how many who are scared shitless have actually changed their lifestyle, I could almost guarantee the obesity rate has gone up since the beginning of 2020

My obesity rate has remained the same!

[firlandsfarm]

I dont think asking questions or criticism is a claim of expertise either. If we can't criticise or question/discuss between ourselves, those that chose to run for the highest positions then I can only presume we are heading for a Chinese or North Korea style of Goverment.

Sorry James, I didn't finish my response ... In my initial reply I was agreeing to asking questions but I think to criticise implies a level of expertise. You are a good trader, I don't trade ... I doubt you would be impressed if I criticised your trading. And the virus has spread somewhat because we are not like China and North Korea (if you can trust the accuracy of their statistics). We didn't lock down as tightly as they did and we released lockdown before we had strangled the virus. It's not that different to Leaving and Remaining ... here we have the Lockdowners and the Freedomers and a balance was sought between stopping the virus and maintaining freedoms and jobs. It's what's know as a good 'old British compromise

[Naffman]

Remember when being fit and healthy reduced your chances of being affected by covid - I wonder how many who are scared shitless have actually changed their lifestyle, I could almost guarantee the obesity rate has gone up since the beginning of 2020

My obesity rate has remained the same!

[Derek27]

For any leader to be able to make every decision he would need to be as knowledgeable as all the experts of all the influences of the situation. I've never heard of anyone who has all those skills at a superior level.

How much knowledge and expertise do you need to realise that five days of free virus-spreading isn't a good idea?

I can't say and that's my point. I don't have the input from the experts telling me what the downside would be if it hadn't been offered. When that decision was made it may have been that he was advised that the demoralising effect of cancelling Christmas would have been worse than the consequences of having Christmas (and remember, it wasn't in those 5 days that you could go and mix with 1,000 people at a rave, you were still expected to use your common sense!). But since that advice was received the downsides of having Christmas out weighed the advantage of having so ... therefore the decision was altered. The problem is Boris and his advisers can't see into the future as far as the lay experts can see into the past.

You can only lockdown with the public's permission and agreement. If the public didn't agree to being locked down over Christmas then it wouldn't happen regardless of what the Government advised. For all we know it could have been a tactic ... show you are on their side, win their support and then unfortunately because it's worse than expected we really do have to lock Christmas down, sorry folks, with Joe Public saying ... " well at least he tried, it must be serious for him to change his mind after all the support he gave for having Christmas". Maybe instead of suggesting he has the intelligence of a shrimp (no offence intended towards shrimps ) we should be thinking ... "wow, what a master stroke, by doing it as he has Christmas was cancelled and we quietly accepted it."!

I can say, absolutely none! If you were in any doubt there were many scientists who crunched the numbers and advised it would be disastrous - advice that BJ ignored. I don't believe his change of mind was planned because it caused an enormous amount of distress and left people stranded and cancelling their holidays.

[firlandsfarm]

I can say, absolutely none! If you were in any doubt there were many scientists who crunched the numbers and advised it would be disastrous - advice that BJ ignored. I don't believe his change of mind was planned because it caused an enormous amount of distress and left people stranded and cancelling their holidays.

Derek, to use an approach that you often use with others ... how do you know what he was and was not told and how do you know how many said "XYZ" and how many said "ABC". Have you seen the minutes of the meetings and read them all? I don't care a hoot how many said whatever, that still has to be offset against opposing judgements that may not have been directly transmission related and I have no idea how those arguments played out. Do you? Also was the degree of aggressiveness of the transmission of the new variant known when the original decision was taken? We don't know. The input to him may have been "It looks to be more aggressive PM but we can't be sure". The 'experts' you are referring to were probably making their comments a couple of days later, with a couple of days more information. And in any event if you were the PM would you take the proclamations of an unvetted 'outsider' or the views of your vetted and trusted advisers? You may ask additional question of them but I suspect you will focus on their advice.

My continual complaint with our media is that they seriously distort situations by publishing claimed experts who disagree with a course of action, they never publish those who agree because there is no news in agreeing. The end result is people think the decision is wrong without hearing the other side and why the decision was taken.

Yes it may have caused distress but it kept people locked down and if those who made plans to meet had exercised a modicum of common sense as I believe you did then they would not have had to cancel anything. I'm not saying it was planned, I'm simply saying that based on what we know as fact as to how the decision was reached (which is near zero) it may have been but then equally it may not have been, it could have been forced upon them by changed circumstances. It's rare that a PM will make a decision off their own back, they make decisions off the back of the advice they have been given.

[Naffman]

So apparently hospitals are at the brink yet didn't we set up nightingale hospitals? What's happened to them? And if there isn't any people in them then why aren't the media pressuring the govt. to open them up instead of causing panic that hospitals are full.

[Archery1969]

So apparently hospitals are at the brink yet didn't we set up nightingale hospitals? What's happened to them? And if there isn't any people in them then why aren't the media pressuring the govt. to open them up instead of causing panic that hospitals are full.

We don’t have the staff to run them. Lots of existing NHS works are off sick with COVID, Stress and other illness. They do have personnel from the Army Medical Core but not many as units are deployed around the world. Also, the large oxygen tanks needed are running low.

[Derek27]

I can say, absolutely none! If you were in any doubt there were many scientists who crunched the numbers and advised it would be disastrous - advice that BJ ignored. I don't believe his change of mind was planned because it caused an enormous amount of distress and left people stranded and cancelling their holidays.

Derek, to use an approach that you often use with others ... how do you know what he was and was not told and how do you know how many said "XYZ" and how many said "ABC". Have you seen the minutes of the meetings and read them all? I don't care a hoot how many said whatever, that still has to be offset against opposing judgements that may not have been directly transmission related and I have no idea how those arguments played out. Do you? Also was the degree of aggressiveness of the transmission of the new variant known when the original decision was taken? We don't know. The input to him may have been "It looks to be more aggressive PM but we can't be sure". The 'experts' you are referring to were probably making their comments a couple of days later, with a couple of days more information. And in any event if you were the PM would you take the proclamations of an unvetted 'outsider' or the views of your vetted and trusted advisers? You may ask additional question of them but I suspect you will focus on their advice.

My continual complaint with our media is that they seriously distort situations by publishing claimed experts who disagree with a course of action, they never publish those who agree because there is no news in agreeing. The end result is people think the decision is wrong without hearing the other side and why the decision was taken.

Yes it may have caused distress but it kept people locked down and if those who made plans to meet had exercised a modicum of common sense as I believe you did then they would not have had to cancel anything. I'm not saying it was planned, I'm simply saying that based on what we know as fact as to how the decision was reached (which is near zero) it may have been but then equally it may not have been, it could have been forced upon them by changed circumstances. It's rare that a PM will make a decision off their own back, they make decisions off the back of the advice they have been given.

Firstly, it was plain common sense that we can't afford 5 days of virus spreading. Secondly, you can forget what the PM was told and by whom once the PM opens his arse and starts talking about the reasons behind his decision: "it would be inhumane", he said about scraping Christmas. Clearly it wasn't, the emergency services don't always get to celebrate Christmas (just look at the 7 coppers who came around when I called them), we're all in an emergency so that was no excuse.

Matt Handjob's convenient excuse was that nobody could have foreseen the new strain of the virus. That's rather like stepping out in front of a bus, getting struck by an asteroid before the bus hits you and claiming you can't foresee an asteroid.

[jamesg46]

I can say, absolutely none! If you were in any doubt there were many scientists who crunched the numbers and advised it would be disastrous - advice that BJ ignored. I don't believe his change of mind was planned because it caused an enormous amount of distress and left people stranded and cancelling their holidays.

Derek, to use an approach that you often use with others ... how do you know what he was and was not told and how do you know how many said "XYZ" and how many said "ABC". Have you seen the minutes of the meetings and read them all? I don't care a hoot how many said whatever, that still has to be offset against opposing judgements that may not have been directly transmission related and I have no idea how those arguments played out. Do you? Also was the degree of aggressiveness of the transmission of the new variant known when the original decision was taken? We don't know. The input to him may have been "It looks to be more aggressive PM but we can't be sure". The 'experts' you are referring to were probably making their comments a couple of days later, with a couple of days more information. And in any event if you were the PM would you take the proclamations of an unvetted 'outsider' or the views of your vetted and trusted advisers? You may ask additional question of them but I suspect you will focus on their advice.

My continual complaint with our media is that they seriously distort situations by publishing claimed experts who disagree with a course of action, they never publish those who agree because there is no news in agreeing. The end result is people think the decision is wrong without hearing the other side and why the decision was taken.

Yes it may have caused distress but it kept people locked down and if those who made plans to meet had exercised a modicum of common sense as I believe you did then they would not have had to cancel anything. I'm not saying it was planned, I'm simply saying that based on what we know as fact as to how the decision was reached (which is near zero) it may have been but then equally it may not have been, it could have been forced upon them by changed circumstances. It's rare that a PM will make a decision off their own back, they make decisions off the back of the advice they have been given.

Firstly, it was plain common sense that we can't afford 5 days of virus spreading. Secondly, you can forget what the PM was told and by whom once the PM opens his arse and starts talking about the reasons behind his decision: "it would be inhumane", he said about scraping Christmas. Clearly it wasn't, the emergency services don't always get to celebrate Christmas (just look at the 7 coppers who came around when I called them), we're all in an emergency so that was no excuse.

Matt Handjob's convenient excuse was that nobody could have foreseen the new strain of the virus. That's rather like stepping out in front of a bus, getting struck by an asteroid before the bus hits you and claiming you can't foresee an asteroid.

Are you drunk already?

[greenmark]

Here's a novel thought. Why not just adhere to govt advice as far as possible. So maintain 1m plus mask, or 2m without mask.
Seems to me we're squandering all the sacrifices of the last 9 months.
The new variant takes us back into +1 R territory.
We all need to tighten up our interactions, not loosen them because vaccines are being rolled out.
Over the last few weeks I've been regularly shocked at the willingness of potentially vulnerable people (ie older than me) to get up close with people.
This is snotty season, whatever you were doing in march/may you need to redouble it now.