[lol768]

> I've posted elsewhere that my cynical view of the UK gov approach is that they are talking tough and doing nothing. So maybe I'm biased?

It's felt like this with all of the tiers to be honest.

They just don't go far enough and the populace is fed up with taking much heed of the rules too.

The November "lockdown" felt very, very different to March when the roads etc were quiet - and it actually felt like people were taking this seriously.

[LatteLazy]

I have to be careful I don't wander into conspiracy theories but...

I'm fed up because so many people flout the rules with no consequences. I suspect that the lack of consequences is intentional. If everyone flours the rules, the economic hit will be smaller and Bojo can claim he did something and its not his fault no one listened. The government have created a situation where the only logical action for normal people is business as usual, that means large excess deaths, and the government has plausible deniability. Whoops.

/RantAndParanoia

[iso1631]

> I'm fed up because so many people flout the rules with no consequences.

Been that way since Barnard's Castle.

The latest decision that says MPs can see their siblings for Christmas Dinner on the 25th, but a Nurse working on the 25th can't see their parent with terminal cancer for dinner on the 26th, will hopefully be ignored.

[londons_explore]

What's especially funny is the latest Tier 4 Health Protection legislation has a specific exception for groups meeting in the grounds of castles...

I can't believe it hasn't made headlines yet...

[switch007]

I think it’s existed longer? I remember reading some legislation during the November lockdown thinking that the Gov is trolling us.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> If everyone flours the rules, the economic hit will be smaller

Only assuming that there's no economic hit to a rampant pandemic spreading death, hospitalisation and illness. Which is a barking mad assumption. It never was "illness vs economy" you either have both good, or you have neither good. They can't be separated.

[konjin]

The people dying from the virus are the old, sick and fat. Not a population that adds much to the economy.

Depending on long term health effects if covid runs wild you can see as many benefits to average people at the end of it as you did after the black death.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> The people dying from the virus are the old, sick and fat.

It's not that simple. It's never that simple: i.e. you have simplified to the point of being flat wrong.

> Depending on long term health effects if covid runs wild you can see as many benefits to average people at the end of it as you did after the black death

I don't know what you mean there, for one thing prevalent Long COVID is really not going to be net benefit, for another you should perhaps rethink your economic argument for genocide / decimation. And your assumption about who is "in groups" / "average people" vs out groups. Your whole line of thinking is lacking in both logic and human decency.

[konjin]

>I don't know what you mean

And yet that didn't stop you from moralizing.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

And you haven't yet started thinking in moral ways, but also your nihilistic desire has stopped you from seeing the logical truth: There are countries that both have the COVID virus under control and also have their economy back on track; and there are countries that have achieved neither. There is no "one or the other". It is "control the virus and benefit economically, or get neither benefit".

[simonbarker87]

There was a decent drop in cases in November from what I can see. You’re right though, the first lock down felt very different.

Sadly the rules are laxer than they should be but the government can’t enforce the rules effectively so are putting in enough grey-area that people can sort of decide for themselves.

Sadly people are very short term focussed and unable to make the most of the situation and instead complain and go about their normal lives with just enough changes that they “feel like they’re doing their bit”.

I love the gym but the move to “keep gyms open” was the best example of people not really getting it and being sad that their toys had been taken away.

The moto in our hose at the moment is “just because you can doesn’t mean you should”

[sgt101]

People are very short term focused on things like; not losing their houses, not losing their businesses, maintaining their families, maintaining their mental health, looking after children.

I don't know your situation, but I have lived a very isolated existance for the last 9 months because I am able to. MANY people I know are not in this position.

[bealesd]

Couldn't agree more. People who have already isolated in previous lockdowns, and lost income, probably can't afford to play it safe. Expecially if they percieve the risk of Covid to be less than the financial risk of playing it safe.

[simonbarker87]

I wasn’t referring to things people HAVE to do to survive - I’m talking about stuff they don’t have to do but want to do because they “just want to be back to normal”

[sgt101]

Schools were still open, and building sites - which made a very significant difference to movement and traffic.

However, if you look at the graphs the dynamic of virus growth did seem to be significantly changed by the intervention.