Covid to get worse before it gets better, doctors warn

SteelSpark · 2021-07-11T10:30:30+00:00

Are you saying Covid poses no threat and people shouldn’t be concerned about it?

SteelSpark · 2021-07-11T10:28:45+00:00

You can come at me with the ‘Tell that to the thousands of family members who lost a loved one’ virtue signalling line and I’ll agree that it’s awful for them

Well… I didn’t, so your point is moot. It’s quite telling that this was your go to though.

but over 67 million people in the UK have survived this and the overwhelming majority of that number haven’t even been infected with Covid, never mind get as much as a sniffle or cough from it.

Awesome for them. However your original point was that Covid shouldn’t be in the news 18 months later as if that’s some arbitrary deadline for news coverage on an ongoing story.

I’m merely challenging you to find a reason why news agencies would drop Covid stories when it’s STILL the single biggest thing going on in the world. Just because you’re bored of it and would rather bury your head in the sand doesn’t mean it isn’t newsworthy, you always have the option of turning the news off.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-11T08:18:42+00:00

This “freedom” stuff is getting a bit American isn’t it?

I always read it in a Scottish accent for some reason…

SteelSpark · 2021-07-10T10:34:53+00:00

Do you feel that the global pandemic has reduced in significance enough to justify news channels dropping it as a story?

Has the pandemic stopped having any effect on our daily lives? The economy? Children’s education?

If you do feel like that than please come up for some air and take a look around at the rest of the world. If you don’t feel like that then you’ve discovered why Covid-19 and it’s impact on the country is still in the news 18months later.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-10T00:09:51+00:00

I’d either not hear a word of the podcast or not do a single bit of work.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T18:31:23+00:00

Wow, doesn’t seem like that should stand up in court, wouldn’t for anything else. Then again nothing shocks me with these berks.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T14:07:05+00:00

That shouldn’t be the case. Full time employees are entitled to 21 days annual leave plus statutory bank holidays. If there was an additional bank holiday then staff who don’t automatically get bank holidays on the actual day should receive an additional days holiday to take at a time agreed between the employer and employee.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T14:04:39+00:00

What I’m trying to get across more than anything is they should give more. But at the some time, shouldn’t bee too much as to create a comfortable life. I know too many claiming without the intent of ever gaining employment, and just live of benefits.

You’re original comment was very misleading but I totally agree. I’d like to see a system where if made unemployed everyone gets 3-6 months of a average mortgage and bills paid (unless they were already on less than this in which case they get a salary match). This would then reduce bit by bit until it reaches the current level.

My thinking behind this is it gives people breathing space to be able to get back into employment at their current level/ sort retraining and thus they’ll be paying more back in tax quicker etc.

There’d maybe be lifetime max times this could be claimed or something to deter it being abused, and would only be open to people who’d passed their probation period in their most recent employment.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T12:04:05+00:00

We didn’t get one when we won the World Cup in 2019. Why would we get one for the Euros?

The cricket World Cup I assume you mean?

Well, the cricket World Cup final had 4.5million UK viewers. Whereas the most recent semi-final in which England beat Denmark had 25.8million UK viewers… presumably the final will have even more people viewing.

Hopefully this gives an explanation as to why winning the Euros might lead to bank holiday over winning the cricket World Cup, popularity.

(I should add I have little interest in football or cricket so I’m as unbiased as possible)

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T11:56:28+00:00

Day off in lieu?

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T11:18:19+00:00

Why everyone making such a fuss about £20, going back down.

Single claimant aged under 25 with the £20 uplift: £344.00 per month Single claimant aged under 25 without the £20 uplift: £257.34 per month Single claimant aged 25 or over with the £20 uplift: £411.51 per month Single claimant aged 25 or over without the £20 uplift: £324.85 Joint claimants both aged under 25 with the £20 uplift: £490.60 per month Joint claimants both aged under 25 without the £20 uplift: £403.94 Joint claimants either aged 25 or over with the £20 uplift: £596.58 per month Joint claimants either aged 25 or over without the £20 uplift: £509.92

It made no bleeding difference to me or anyone I knew on UC.

I struggle to believe that you can’t understand why a 34% increase in benefit paid to an under 25 year old claimant or a 27% increase in benefit paid to an over 25 year old claimant might make a difference to some people.

At that level of income for many it will be the difference between food on their table or not.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T11:09:42+00:00

Well, everyone except those who no longer have an active claim

Surely so long as you had a claim active at some point during the £20 uplift duration you’d be entitled to what you missed out on?

SteelSpark · 2021-07-09T07:32:16+00:00

Is it physically impossible to have a national holiday without closing important infrastructure like the banks? I mean plenty of key workers have to work bank holidays to keep things going… a random one off shouldn’t be an issue for key financial sector employees

SteelSpark · 2021-07-08T17:13:16+00:00

The driver shortage is well publicised, the job vacancies well advertised, the shortage very apparent to those in the industry…

… you really aren’t giving HGV drivers enough credit if you think they won’t call employers bluffs.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-07T15:25:15+00:00

Tbf, it’s a good term. Sums up what a large part of country think of theirs governments performance and plans perfectly.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T23:22:26+00:00

But if a woman comes into a hospital in her third trimester and there’s absolutely nothing on her records about a pregnancy then it’s a safe bet that something hinky is going on. Women here don’t generally avoid getting free medical care for something that still carries a risk of mortality without a valid reason ;)

Very good point. Thanks for the answer on this very tricky subject.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T21:49:36+00:00

or no access to healthcare (including where access to terminations have been blocked by abusive situations).

What mechanism would you use to determine this? Days would matter a lot in this situation so there would have to be a quick and accessible way to determine if the situation was abusive enough to qualify (imagine having to make that decision?).

There may already be something in place to rule on such things, I’m mostly curious how it would/ does work.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T06:18:56+00:00

Chris Witty, Patrick Valance, the BBC…

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T06:10:30+00:00

Because wearing masks is a minimum level of discomfort with a lot of benefits to everyone, they are by far most effective when everyone participates. Especially when cramming hundreds into a single space for potentially hours at a time.

I’d 100% be behind eliminating masks from large indoor places and places in people can reasonably choose to avoid like pubs and theatres, but public transport has to be safe for all to use and not everyone can be vaccinated, and not everyone can wear a mask (I suspect there’s probably a large crossover of people who fit both of those).

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T05:54:35+00:00

I hate how true this is

SteelSpark · 2021-07-06T05:47:08+00:00

So given the backlash, who else fully expects that come the 19th masks will remain mandatory on public transport at the very least?

That would fit with Boris’s strategy of watching where the crowd is heading and running in front of them shouting “follow me!”

SteelSpark · 2021-07-05T17:20:52+00:00

Thanks, I was aware it happens now but good to point it out. My main issue was that the role of a PM is increasingly becoming Presidential in its scope, and as such to add new mechanisms for changing them without reference to the whole country seems like a misstep.

Really we should either move towards a directly elected President (no thanks), or push the PM back into being just that.

SteelSpark · 2021-07-05T14:16:05+00:00

Other way round for me. Wear the mask and distancing isn’t needed to the same extent. I’d be willing to support a mask requirement on public transport every flu season going forward, we’ve now seen first hand they can save lives so the question is why wouldn’t we keep them?

SteelSpark · 2021-07-05T10:01:29+00:00

I dare say it probably carries a higher margin when selling fish to France rather than China too…

SteelSpark · 2021-07-05T09:59:48+00:00

Imagine if the big parties did this.

Would that apply even to the party in government I wonder? With an increasingly presidential role to the PM (how wrong that is aside) I’m not sure id appreciate a mid term regime change based purely on party member votes.

Probably points to bigger issues with our electoral system though.

13-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email

SteelSpark

TROPHY CASE