Oh right.
I would agree with you that the minimum level restrictions are pointless. Pure tokenism.
Ultimately it boils down to parents. When a parent is lazy and doesnât want to spend the time cooking the right food or dealing with the tantrums of their kids for eating their veg etc its not going to change. Only way is to tax the fuck out of takeaways and sugar.
1 Like
Once you get into language like âmain driversâ youâre on shaky ground.
The entirety of a normally functioning society is the main driver.
If you want OIUTF, you have to accept what that entails as regards matches and venues.
In a no restrictions society, matches come with large crowds. If thatâs say, Leinster v Munster at Lansdowne Road, thatâs 50k there, thatâs full pubs afterwards.
That then is a serious driver. As is everything else.
The only way they can no longer be drivers of infection is if Covid is driven down.
As long as they arenât, they are drivers. As is every one of the hundreds of millions of tiny human interactions in Ireland each day.
Weâre not seeing any benefit deriving from maintaining more restrictions than most of Europe, thatâs for sure.
The rest of Europe doesnât share an open land border with the United Kingdom of Plague Island & Northern Plagueland.
Buy my point is maybe there is just going to be a whole rethink on society and people will come down on the side of âprotecting livesâ ahead of things that are viewed by most as luxuries. The vast majority of people never go near a match or a nightclub. Forget altogether about covid it will just be to protect people from getting sick from any illness over the winter.
Iâve been surprised the whole way through by how much support the lidtf cause has had.
Thatâs going to be the next chapter of the debate. More proof needed on whether nightclubs or matches cause significant spread of illness. Theyâre easy ones to get rid of as the vast majority of people (voters) donât give a shite about them. Itâll take a good media campaign in their favour and the likes of Leo will have to be brought onside.
1 Like
A post loaded with presumptions. If you want to maintain restrictions on match capacities or anything else we should be able to show why weâre doing it. I donât see the point of restrictions on outdoor events. Matches should be full capacity.
Bars etc are different, in theory. But again if we are going to shut down a sector we should be able to show that it is shut down for a reason. If itâs a significant driver of infection rates then maybe there is an argument for it.
On your presumption that a full crowd followed by pubs after will drive rates, again, you need to show to what degree. Other countries allow these activities and have done for months and yet have better outcomes. Rates in Limerick went down after the all Ireland final, an isolated example but it doesnât fit with the theory that crowds at an outdoor event plus pubs after will inevitably drive infection rates to a degree that we canât live with.
Itâs quite possible. Society has always been a balancing act regarding personal freedoms and the the wider health of the collective. Maybe people will look at it differently from here on.
I hope not
1 Like
Theyâre dopes, a lot of it is virtue signaling. These same shrews had no interest when flu annually ravaged the health system and now they pretend to be humanitarians.
1 Like
You keep saying this but you have no real evidence to suggest this drives infection rates significantly.
Are we?
We did not have the pubs open last winter and things went of control. There were very severe restrictions last winter and things went out of control.
Think the Swedes who had minor restrictions last winter got on a lot better than most of Europe.
Exactly that. For long periods of the pandemic there was people in favour of more restrictions. What they meant is more restrictions that didnât affect them. Shutting down sport or nightclubs as youâve said are good examples of that. The witch-hunt against travel is another.
4 Likes
I agree with that but tbf you wanted the domestic economy restricted or shutdown but at the same time wanted the ability to travel. That was looking after your own needs.
Getting the country up and running first and foremost should always supersede foreign travel.
2 Likes
In a no restrictions environment where Covid is spreading unchecked, it will be entirely rational for people to want to avoid crowded venues. It will be entirely rational for people to want to avoid social interactions as much as possible.
In a no restrictions environment, society cannot sustain that voluntarily reduced level of interaction and economic activity.
The only way this problem can be solved is to drive Covid down and out.
The OIUTF mob have never engaged in good faith with other viewpoints. They have never considered other viewpoints, because OIUTF by definition demands a level of hubris and Dunning Kruger delusion that refuses to engage and consider other viewpoints. It cannot comprehend that anybody would disagree with OIUTF.
Thatâs why you and others are now âsurprisedâ that youâre out of step. And why most of the OIUTF mob here are not just surprised, but utterly furious at being out of step.
Iâd imagine GPâs not seeing patients without a negative PCR test is a major factor in the explosion in A&E numbers tbh.
If you have a person who wonât go for a vaccine or a test then there only option is wandering into A&E.
Again itâs amazing the drop off in A&E attendances when the public was in actual fear of the Virus.
2 Likes
The impending return of Tony has people at each others throats again, his work is already done
1 Like
I agree with some of that but I donât think you take a balanced view of it either.
I donât usually say this but âthe marketâ will sort it out. If people donât want to go to packed pubs and matches they wonât and thereâs evidence they might not. Those who want to should be allowed.
1 Like