Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
You could show a bit of compassion and empathy. Frankly you sound like a bit of dick, to be honest with you.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?
I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.
So people choose Y.
Er, no. Employee Y faces disciplinary action for not turning up to work. Employees have never been the decision-makers on whether to be on furlough or not.
The big problem here - the comfortable work from home middle classes telling the least well off to go out and ‘take one for the team’.
This for a virus which, just this week, has been calculated to affect those with degrees of deprivation.
This is pretty incendiary stuff and exactly what I was warning against here yesterday. No attempt to suggest that the poorest, the public facing workers, those with conditions but who are not ‘at very high risk’ need greater protection, both heathwise and economically.
Strikes have happened for far, far less than this. The unions are probably thinking ‘if not now, when’.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
Understood, thanks for offering your kind words and compassion.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
You could start with "I'm sorry I'm luckier than some people and that I have no idea what it's like for others" but instead you come in with this matter of fact approach which even if it's right, doesn't help anyone who is feeling vulnerable right now.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
What's a "facilities team". Never come across that in any office I've worked in ?
Apparently recommendation on masks coming this week.
Not recommendation, "advice".
I haven’t seen the paper, as it hasn’t yet been published, but interesting.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says/amp ... This comes despite Japan having no lockdown, still-active subways, and many businesses that have remained open—reportedly including karaoke bars, although Japanese citizens and industries are practicing social distancing where they can. Nor have the Japanese broadly embraced contact tracing, a practice by which health authorities identify someone who has been infected and then attempt to identify everyone that person might have interacted with—and potentially infected. So how does Japan do it?
“One reason is that nearly everyone there is wearing a mask,” said De Kai, an American computer scientist with joint appointments at UC Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute and at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. He is also the chief architect of an in-depth study, set to be released in the coming days, that suggests that every one of us should be wearing a mask—whether surgical or homemade, scarf or bandana—like they do in Japan and other countries, mostly in East Asia. This formula applies to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence (occasional mask refuseniks) as well as every other official who routinely interacts with people in public settings. Among the findings of their research paper, which the team plans to submit to a major journal: If 80% of a closed population were to don a mask, COVID-19 infection rates would statistically drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections—compared to a live-virus population in which no one wore masks....
I know the government have been vague on this (clearly not wanting repeat of bog roll stockpiling), but shocked to see how few people wear one here in the UK. It seems one of the easiest things you can do and there is not really any downside.
I think it's very plausible that the major route of transmission could be large droplets when people talk face-to-face, and masks could have a dramatic effect on that.
Personally, it just seems a no-brainer. I have a respirator mask and goggles. If we do find out that isn't a major source of transmission, well all i have lost is looking like a bit of a tool.
Any particular reason why school teachers can't work through July and August this year?
Yes. We will have taught our contracted amount of days for the current school year, I suppose they could offer extra pay pro rata but that will cost heavily.
That won’t necessarily be true in the state sector depending on how they approached opening for key workers although I can see it might be a problem in the private sector.
I think in your case the really bad news is this 14 day quarantine. That immediately epically buggers any private school that relies on overseas students.
My concern about working would be that given how brutal the autumn term is anyway it would require a three week holiday at the end of September.
We’re told that there is still a high level of interest from overseas but the reality I fear will be much different. One of ours who returned hime took nearly a month to get out of two separate quarantines! They haven’t messed about in Asia like we’ve done.
The phrase was ‘some time with their teachers’, which most schools will take as being very limited, probably with a skeleton staff for a day or two.
So September it is.
If I were an international student, I wouldn’t be looking to travel overseas for an education right now. It might be two years before that changes. That’s longer than most boarding schools will survive without them.
Pretty much all non teaching staff are furloughed and I expect that they will continue that through the summer. I wonder if the % is decreased if they will furlough teaching staff as well to make more savings. It makes sense when you think about it,
So we have no catering, no real premises staff, no cleaning, nothing much in the way of matronic staff. For a few days here and there I don’t think they are going to unfurlough them, so there is no real school to go to. Now I’m thinking through it, the sheer mucked uppery of this becomes clearer, it’s as though he had to say something different but didn’t have anything useful to add (is this what they call virtue signalling, making a show of something without actually backing it up? It’s not a term I’ve ‘got’ before but, if so, this seems to be it!)
You can’t furlough people who are on holiday. It’s a loophole in the system that is also going to cause private schools massive headaches over the summer holiday when most of them are on the edge financially anyway.
So not teaching staff but office staff, finance, some catering and all of the premises staff would normally be working, so they can be furloughed can’t they?
Yes, as long as they do not take leave at the time.
It shouldn’t be a problem. However, I’m also guessing they represent 30% of the wage bill?
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
Understood, thanks for offering your kind words and compassion.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
All the best to you.
I really hope that we get antibody tests and a vaccine ASAP to end this misery.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
The office is still close so no, no and no.
But he said everyone who can’t work from home must go to work.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
The office is still close so no, no and no.
But he said everyone who can’t work from home must go to work.
In that situation there isn't a job to go to work for.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
You could start with "I'm sorry I'm luckier than some people and that I have no idea what it's like for others" but instead you come in with this matter of fact approach which even if it's right, doesn't help anyone who is feeling vulnerable right now.
Sorry I thought we were discussing this politically and not as a counsellor for someone's troubles.
This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?
I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.
So people choose Y.
No. If the employer calls people in, and they won't come, then they get £0. If they are vulnerable and should be shielding, or if they are self isolating then they should get SSP, but that's not nearly as generous.
Now some employers may be pragmatic - we've got a guy with reduced lung function, we'll keep him furloughed as long as possible over some of the other guys, but ultimately it's a decision entirely for the employer how they approach this sort of thing.
Certainly employees can't just decide they like having their feet up for 80% money, that's not their call.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
Understood, thanks for offering your kind words and compassion.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
All the best to you.
I really hope that we get antibody tests and a vaccine ASAP to end this misery.
As long as Roche aren't billy bullshitting (and see no real why they would), the antibody test should be widely available by the end of this month.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
You could start with "I'm sorry I'm luckier than some people and that I have no idea what it's like for others" but instead you come in with this matter of fact approach which even if it's right, doesn't help anyone who is feeling vulnerable right now.
Sorry I thought we were discussing this politically and not as a counsellor for someone's troubles.
I said it was shit but you objected to that.
I hope you have a lovely evening and all the best to you and your family. Stay safe.
You can play sport, but only with members of your own household. But you could do that anyway surely. So does he mean you can play sport with people who are not in your own household? Likewise park benches?
If so, then the lockdown is over.
I think the point is the old rule was supposed you were doing some short directed exercise e.g. run, bike. What they are saying now is if you want to go the park, hang out, kick a ball about, thats ok.
And they are now saying things like golf, tennis, fishing are ok. They werent before.
It is all about nudging.
With people inside or outside your household?
Looking forward to seeing the SI.
Fishing is exercise?
It is if you're tramping 7 miles to a Sutherland hill loch. Which of course one can't do in any case.
This is the new fifth test, as the Prime Minister put it today:
“And last, we must make sure that any measures we take do not force the reproduction rate of the disease - the R - back up over one, so that we have the kind of exponential growth we were facing a few weeks ago.“
It's a good 5th test actually.
I agree with you and @AlastairMeeks - its an important point, and a good one.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
Understood, thanks for offering your kind words and compassion.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
All the best to you.
I really hope that we get antibody tests and a vaccine ASAP to end this misery.
Me too. I understand the greater good and all that but I won't lie and say I'm finding it difficult.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
I know I'd hate it and you have my sympathies. Unfortunately it's going to be July at the earliest before friends and family are part of the equation. That's assuming people aren't complete dickheads and start partying on beaches and raise the R above 1.
Understood, thanks for offering your kind words and compassion.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
All the best to you.
With 44% now working at least some of the time from home (12% before covid) WFH will become a big part of the economy and with it a considerable reduction in public transport
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Trying to cut out the flim-flam from the PM's statement and it seems to me that the strategy is to keep R below 1 and aim for local eradication of the virus, while returning as much of the economy as possible to action and loosening those restrictions that have little effect on R. I am largely in agreement on the strategy.
I have serious doubts on the government's competence to pull this off, and I fear that a failure on contact tracing is going to give us a second peak. It also means that the government is asking people to sacrifice social contact for longer in return for being able to reactivate the economy earlier.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
You could start with "I'm sorry I'm luckier than some people and that I have no idea what it's like for others" but instead you come in with this matter of fact approach which even if it's right, doesn't help anyone who is feeling vulnerable right now.
Sorry I thought we were discussing this politically and not as a counsellor for someone's troubles.
I said it was shit but you objected to that.
I hope you have a lovely evening and all the best to you and your family. Stay safe.
You too I hope you have a lovely time too and all the best for yourself.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Thought you disagreed with quite a lot of what I post - but you seem fairly balanced in my view.
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
I'm not. It sucks. Life sucks sometimes. Some people get cancer and others don't. Some people live by themselves and others don't. Some people have lost their jobs and others haven't. Some people have died and others haven't.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
You could start with "I'm sorry I'm luckier than some people and that I have no idea what it's like for others" but instead you come in with this matter of fact approach which even if it's right, doesn't help anyone who is feeling vulnerable right now.
Sorry I thought we were discussing this politically and not as a counsellor for someone's troubles.
The fewer white collar workers on public transport the better. It really is quite simple.
The white collar workers can work far more from home. Many businesses will have a mix of white and blue collar, less white collar workers at the workplace keeps the blue collar workers safer.
So the cleaners, receptionists and facilities teams should come into work tomorrow, the office workers should stay put.
The office is still close so no, no and no.
But he said everyone who can’t work from home must go to work.
This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?
I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.
So people choose Y.
Er, no. Employee Y faces disciplinary action for not turning up to work. Employees have never been the decision-makers on whether to be on furlough or not.
No - only if the employer refuses to comply with employees wishes. They won`t refuse. Why would they? They can keep employee on books at no cost.
This won`t work. The government needs to announce an end to furlough payments for everyone except the specific industries which they are barring from operating. Work in a restaurant - furloughed. Work in building industry - go to work or don`t get paid.
I commented to my other half yesterday just how lucky we are right now.
We both have each other, jobs that we can do mostly from home, a garden, friends, no home schooling to worry about, neither of us is vulnerable by condition or age and no relatives in a care home. Heck we've even got a stack of N95 respirator masks ! The truth is most people simply aren't that lucky, and those of us in a happy situation should realise that for lots of people this is hard. Very very hard.
Another person who appears to have had a lobotomy. It is now standard criticism from those who don't like Boris to cry confusion. There was nothing in there an 11 year old wouldn't have understood.
I relay - it’s not particularly my view.
My view was summed up by @Ishmael_Z above, it was a nothingburger. It was essentially a string of decisions yet to be taken and a few gewgaws now that make no real difference, save perhaps the one about going back to work which was so hedged it is unclear how directional the government intends to be (presumably because it doesn’t know).
I wasn't saying it was. I was saying it is standard criticism by public figures who don't like Boris.
They always go but but but this is far too confusing for the public to understand. They said the same at the start of the lockdown and the public showed they understood.
You already know what the usual suspects are going to say even before Johnson has said anything. They are also convinced that common sense no longer exists.
They obviously also missed (deliberately) that more details are being given to parliament tomorrow.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Thought you disagreed with quite a lot of what I post - but you seem fairly balanced in my view.
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
I'll fly the red flag when I can, but never for Jeremy Corbyn. As you have now seen the light welcome to reality.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Thought you disagreed with quite a lot of what I post - but you seem fairly balanced in my view.
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
I'll fly the red flag when I can, but never for Jeremy Corbyn. As you have now seen the light welcome to reality.
It's always good to accept one's failings and supporting Corbyn for so long was a mistake. I still support a lot of his policies though.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
That is a particularly heatless post. Grow up!
Its cold analysis on a politics site of the options available to us yes but I don't see why growing up is needed and I acknowledged how shit the situation is.
If there was a nice easy solution that let people socially gather while not making millions get sick and not having hundreds of die then don't you think we'd be doing that already?
I commented to my other half yesterday just how lucky we are right now.
We both have each other, jobs that we can do mostly from home, a garden, friends, no home schooling to worry about, neither of us is vulnerable by condition or age and no relatives in a care home. Heck we've even got a stack of N95 respirator masks ! The truth is most people simply aren't that lucky, and those of us in a happy situation should realise that for lots of people this is hard. Very very hard.
Completely agree. At times this site can be fantastic but at other times it's heartless what I've seen posted.
Can we open the office in Leeds, but not the office Aberdeen?
How's this any different from having different health regulations either side of the border? You listen to the body that has authority in the relevant area.
Biggest problem I have with this announcement is that, going forward, further loosening of the lock-down will be dependent upon this mysterious R number which at the moment, according to the PM. stands at somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9. Seems quite a wide range and at the upper limit is close to us tipping into another spike.
Presumably it is the lack of testing that is making the size of the R number so uncertain.
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
That is a particularly heatless post. Grow up!
Its cold analysis on a politics site of the options available to us yes but I don't see why growing up is needed and I acknowledged how shit the situation is.
If there was a nice easy solution that let people socially gather while not making millions get sick and not having hundreds of die then don't you think we'd be doing that already?
Sometimes, when one has nothing nice to say it is best to say nothing at all. cRB has indicated he is struggling under the circumstances, so the last thing he needs is someone who should know better adding to the distress by being unnecessarily unpleasant.
Biggest problem I have with this announcement is that, going forward, further loosening of the lock-down will be dependent upon this mysterious R number which at the moment, according to the PM. stands at somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9. Seems quite a wide range and at the upper limit is close to us tipping into another spike.
Presumably it is the lack of testing that is making the size of the R number so uncertain.
I thought it was more to do with geographical variation. Track and trace will be useful for helping to contain localised outbreaks.
Biggest problem I have with this announcement is that, going forward, further loosening of the lock-down will be dependent upon this mysterious R number which at the moment, according to the PM. stands at somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9. Seems quite a wide range and at the upper limit is close to us tipping into another spike.
Presumably it is the lack of testing that is making the size of the R number so uncertain.
Lack of testing? We're testing around 100k samples a day....
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Thought you disagreed with quite a lot of what I post - but you seem fairly balanced in my view.
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
I'll fly the red flag when I can, but never for Jeremy Corbyn. As you have now seen the light welcome to reality.
It's always good to accept one's failings and supporting Corbyn for so long was a mistake. I still support a lot of his policies though.
I am happy enough with Starmer for now.
Thank you for the welcome, friend.
Keep the faith. When you do experience a GE97 moment it will be worth all the heartache. It may be a while coming, but when it does...
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
That is a particularly heatless post. Grow up!
Its cold analysis on a politics site of the options available to us yes but I don't see why growing up is needed and I acknowledged how shit the situation is.
If there was a nice easy solution that let people socially gather while not making millions get sick and not having hundreds of die then don't you think we'd be doing that already?
Sometimes, when one has nothing nice to say it is best to say nothing at all. cRB has indicated he is struggling under the circumstances, so the last thing he needs is someone who should know better adding to the distress by being unnecessarily unpleasant.
I wasn't trying to be unpleasant and I said it was shit and acknowledged that.
I'm sorry for the unpleasantness people are going through, it is not nice at all for many people. Being at home with two restless housebound very young children who miss their friends and never stop or get a break is not easy either. Everyone is suffering now and I hope it ends soon.
Biggest problem I have with this announcement is that, going forward, further loosening of the lock-down will be dependent upon this mysterious R number which at the moment, according to the PM. stands at somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9. Seems quite a wide range and at the upper limit is close to us tipping into another spike.
Presumably it is the lack of testing that is making the size of the R number so uncertain.
Lack of testing? We're testing around 100k samples a day....
Although if a lot of the transmission is in care homes, it means R is effectively lower for most of us, who never go near one
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
I understand that. Shit happens.
Why are you so rude?
Just ignore.
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
Is this a criticism of me? I'm sorry I have different views to many here, I believe I've always been respectful in how I debate.
Not directly. I am in the same boat, so it also applies to me.
Thought you disagreed with quite a lot of what I post - but you seem fairly balanced in my view.
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
I'll fly the red flag when I can, but never for Jeremy Corbyn. As you have now seen the light welcome to reality.
It's always good to accept one's failings and supporting Corbyn for so long was a mistake. I still support a lot of his policies though.
I am happy enough with Starmer for now.
Thank you for the welcome, friend.
Keep the faith. When you do experience a GE97 moment it will be worth all the heartache. It may be a while coming, but when it does...
I hope it comes soon. I sort of know Starmer and know he's a decent and smart bloke.
"Back to Work" was exactly right. The message is that if you can't work from home, you should go back again in the next few days. The angling etc is a distraction.
This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?
I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.
So people choose Y.
No I don't think people have that choice. They certainly didn't have it when lockdown started. If a company decides they are ending the furlough then the worker has cannot themselves decide to stay on. The money will stop.
This is the elephant in the room: the government clearly want folk back at work, except for in certain areas e.g. pubs, restaurants, retail etc. But what isn`t clear is how fast the furlough payments stop when they do. It sounded to me like "should" go back to work still implies choice. If it is a choice between 1) going back to work and losing furlough to be replaced by wages again, or 2) staying at home and continuing draw 80% from the government, then why go back to work?
I would assume because furlough is the choice of the company not the individual workers. So if a company decides that some of its staff can return then they would no longer have the choice of furlough. Ity is exactly how things were done when furlough started with many companies sending a percentage of their workforce home but keeping the rest working.
Yes - you`ve made my point for me. So ABC Ltd start operating again, employee X goes back to work, back to normal. Employee Y says "no, I`m not going back to work". So (presumably, and in my view regretably) Y continues to receive his 80/100% for staying at home off the back of his employer`s application for payment.
So people choose Y.
No. If the employer calls people in, and they won't come, then they get £0. If they are vulnerable and should be shielding, or if they are self isolating then they should get SSP, but that's not nearly as generous.
Now some employers may be pragmatic - we've got a guy with reduced lung function, we'll keep him furloughed as long as possible over some of the other guys, but ultimately it's a decision entirely for the employer how they approach this sort of thing.
Certainly employees can't just decide they like having their feet up for 80% money, that's not their call.
Well, I hope you`re right. But I don`t get this at all.
An example: my brother in law works for an architect/glass installer business. They have furloughed 50% of the staff and kept the other 50% working (my brother-in-law is pissed off because he was selected for the latter group, but that`s beside the point).
Now - post speech today - they all should be back at work as asap - yes? But you are suggesting that the employer could still choose to keep group A on furlough.
France short of PPE, and delays odd how that seems to have escaped Sky until tonight.
And the Germans. Has the EU scheme still not started providing yet?
Remarkable that getting a sclerotic bureaucracy to act as a middle man is slower than going to companies that produce and provide it direct. Whoever could have foreseen that?
Could have been answered in a Tweet that, instead we had an empty and pointless announcement of nothing.
As long as I am unable to leave my home for more than exercise, or go back to work in an office, life has not changed.
Come on CHB, can't you for once, just once, take off the Party glasses?
Nothing has changed for me. Perhaps for other people - but not for me.
Then good yours didn't need to change then. You're able to go to the office now if you need to do so, and if you don't need to do so then what are you bothered about?
Can't see some of my family or my friends - and I feel as isolated and lonely as I was before.
They've deemed it not safe to change that yet.
Its not particularly logical. You could have a household of 10 working in 5 separate locations who are all allowed to interact.
Yet boyfriend and girlfriend living separately on their own and not going to work are supposed to not see each other for at least another 3 weeks.
Going in to work you're supposed to socially distance still.
Are you suggesting boyfriend and girlfriend living separately should see each other and socially distance while seeing each other? Interesting thought.
No Im stating that two households of single people combined are far smaller than many households. They should be allowed to see each other as they please.
Of course if you are a govt adviser you can just break the laws without any risk of enforcement.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Once you say people can visit each other the lockdown is essentially over. I'm sorry for those who hadn't moved in with their loved one but they're just out of luck sorry and its not unreasonable of the government to not fix the fact they hadn't moved in together.
Says the person living with a loving family.
Yes both in the household and out of it. The government didn't get me my loving family and its not on the government to provide loving families. I have loved ones outside the household I'd love to see but we can't see each other beyond video calls at the minute.
Yes, so imagine how you feel about not seeing your family out of your household and multiply that to include not seeing ANY family or friends.
You are speaking from a position of huge privilege.
A lot of my friends who aren't married moved in with their partners if they weren't already living together before the lockdown was officially in place or after 14 days had passed. Some even went back home to their parents but are now seriously regretting it!
You have no idea what it's like for so many who are cut off.
Yes the lockdown sucks and sucks more for some people than others.
The alternative is exponential growth of the virus and letting hundreds of thousands die.
So pick your poison. Which would you prefer?
That is a particularly heatless post. Grow up!
Its cold analysis on a politics site of the options available to us yes but I don't see why growing up is needed and I acknowledged how shit the situation is.
If there was a nice easy solution that let people socially gather while not making millions get sick and not having hundreds of die then don't you think we'd be doing that already?
Sometimes, when one has nothing nice to say it is best to say nothing at all. cRB has indicated he is struggling under the circumstances, so the last thing he needs is someone who should know better adding to the distress by being unnecessarily unpleasant.
I wasn't trying to be unpleasant and I said it was shit and acknowledged that.
I'm sorry for the unpleasantness people are going through, it is not nice at all for many people. Being at home with two restless housebound very young children who miss their friends and never stop or get a break is not easy either. Everyone is suffering now and I hope it ends soon.
It might be nice if you addressed that comment to CHB. Nonetheless a good post.
Yet the public (or the people who do opinion polls) rate him 48-19 better than Starmer in terms of who they'd like to lead us through the covid crisis.
Someone who shook hands with people before telling us not to, was late to lockdown, responsible for tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, caught the disease along with his closest allies in the fight against it, nearly died, looks like shit, and is forensically picked apart by Sir Keir at PMQs (to take his opponents view on all the aforementioned as legit)
Either the polls are nonsense, or the public always prefer charisma to nerdiness. The polls may well be nonsense, but in real elections...
When has the nerdier option won?
1997 Blair vs Major - Nerd lost 2001 Blair vs Hague - Nerd lost 2005 Blair vs Howard - Nerd lost 2010 Brown vs Cameron - Nerd lost 2015 Cameron vs Miliband - Nerd lost 2016 EU Ref Cameron & Osborne vs Boris & Farage - Nerds lost 2017 May vs Corbyn - Nerd won narrowly after polls gave unassailable lead 2019 Boris vs Corbyn - Nerd lost 2024 Boris vs Starmer...
This is a very subjective definition of Nerd. I notice that you have Corbyn as a nerd in 2019 but not in 2017. I don't think that Howard was a nerd. WIthout charisma yes but not nerdy. I would also say that Thatcher was both nerdy and charismatic, and to a lesser extent so was Tony Blair.
It's relative to the person they were up against, so of course it can change. Corbyn isnt as much of a nerd as May but is far nerdier than Boris
What's the general consensus on whether Trump will be re-elected?
Much of it depends on how Biden performs in the campaign. If he goes all Captain Alzheimers then Trump will walk it, if his team are able to hide that then it will be close. If Biden isn't the candidate then I think.the Dems will walk it.
I think I just heard Ydoethur and every other secondary school teacher scream.
Here is my question.
I’m teaching from home.
If I go back into school, because they don’t have the necessary tech, I can’t do that.
So I might be able to teach 12 and 10.
What happens to 7, 8 and 9?
It sounded like all they are thinking about is a transition day or something. This idea of ‘seeing’ their teacher is nonsensical; likely a hastily changed sentence to replace something that fell apart during the talks with unions.
By the end of June it’s just assemblies (not going to happen), prizegiving (not going to happen), sports days (not going to happen) and concerts (not going to happen) anyway.
Quite embarrassing, really. If they are this confused over education it makes you question everything else. If they just want to let them see their mates they should have just said that.
That is not the case in the state sector where we teach three weeks into July.
Can we open the office in Leeds, but not the office Aberdeen?
How's this any different from having different health regulations either side of the border? You listen to the body that has authority in the relevant area.
Exactly. Either you have devolution or you don't: part 17,225,453 in an ongoing series...
So if you what to go anywhere else in the would, just get a flight to France and then go to and form there? grate for the French airline industry, bad for the Uk tourist industry.
Comments
This for a virus which, just this week, has been calculated to affect those with degrees of deprivation.
This is pretty incendiary stuff and exactly what I was warning against here yesterday. No attempt to suggest that the poorest, the public facing workers, those with conditions but who are not ‘at very high risk’ need greater protection, both heathwise and economically.
Strikes have happened for far, far less than this. The unions are probably thinking ‘if not now, when’.
But what's your solution? Either we have a lockdown, which sucks in one way. Or we don't and hundreds of thousands die and millions get sick which sucks in another way. What's your preference.
If there was a nice easy solution that didn't suck we'd be going for that. The only available solutions are all shit to one extent or another.
I've accepted the situation and only exercise is keeping me going. I'd like to go back to the office but I think that we will be WFH for the rest of the year.
All the best to you.
Did we lose a war or something?
Cleaners can be reduced with less staff I think ?
It shouldn’t be a problem. However, I’m also guessing they represent 30% of the wage bill?
Don't forget when someone of your political persuasion enters PB you are like an Evertonian who enters a pub full of Liverpool fans
But he said everyone who can’t work from home must go to work.
https://twitter.com/PeterNimmo1/status/1259566474659856386?s=20
Is this a bilateral agreement just between UK and France ignoring the rest of the EU
I said it was shit but you objected to that.
Now some employers may be pragmatic - we've got a guy with reduced lung function, we'll keep him furloughed as long as possible over some of the other guys, but ultimately it's a decision entirely for the employer how they approach this sort of thing.
Certainly employees can't just decide they like having their feet up for 80% money, that's not their call.
Whatever we do, we have to avoid exponentially.
(Epidemiologist on twitter)
I have serious doubts on the government's competence to pull this off, and I fear that a failure on contact tracing is going to give us a second peak. It also means that the government is asking people to sacrifice social contact for longer in return for being able to reactivate the economy earlier.
As it happens I was talking to a builder today who said the brickies would be back at work tomorrow whatever.
White collar folk on lockdown want to do it in their new homes, not their old ones...
I have no problem with opposing views, as long as people are respectful.
This seems to be the union argument. Not without merit
This won`t work. The government needs to announce an end to furlough payments for everyone except the specific industries which they are barring from operating. Work in a restaurant - furloughed. Work in building industry - go to work or don`t get paid.
One major new weapon is coming though: antibody tests have got very accurate, and will be used in big numbers. That'll really help on several fronts.
Some people clearly are unable to listen to/understand simple sentences.
We both have each other, jobs that we can do mostly from home, a garden, friends, no home schooling to worry about, neither of us is vulnerable by condition or age and no relatives in a care home. Heck we've even got a stack of N95 respirator masks !
The truth is most people simply aren't that lucky, and those of us in a happy situation should realise that for lots of people this is hard. Very very hard.
You already know what the usual suspects are going to say even before Johnson has said anything. They are also convinced that common sense no longer exists.
They obviously also missed (deliberately) that more details are being given to parliament tomorrow.
I am happy enough with Starmer for now.
Thank you for the welcome, friend.
Can we open the office in Leeds, but not the office Aberdeen?
If there was a nice easy solution that let people socially gather while not making millions get sick and not having hundreds of die then don't you think we'd be doing that already?
Disclosure: I’ve already done this and I have no regrets at all.
CONTROL THE TORIES
Presumably it is the lack of testing that is making the size of the R number so uncertain.
And is been so smug about turning it over a couple of weeks ago.
I'm sorry for the unpleasantness people are going through, it is not nice at all for many people. Being at home with two restless housebound very young children who miss their friends and never stop or get a break is not easy either. Everyone is suffering now and I hope it ends soon.
An example: my brother in law works for an architect/glass installer business. They have furloughed 50% of the staff and kept the other 50% working (my brother-in-law is pissed off because he was selected for the latter group, but that`s beside the point).
Now - post speech today - they all should be back at work as asap - yes? But you are suggesting that the employer could still choose to keep group A on furlough.
If this is the case, what has changed?
https://twitter.com/FranceintheUK/status/1259562622430654464?s=20
It was meant to start delivering equipment at the very latest a couple of weeks ago, but I've heard nothing since then.
"The poorest are to go back to work".
That's what is going to stick.
I think the gloves are going to come off big time tomorrow.