To think "it's alright for you" for those who want lockdown for now until eternity?

[GlummyMcGlummerson]

I've seen, on both MN and social media, outrage after the PM announcement last night that strict lockdown won't be in place any more. Lots of sensationalist "great so now people can come to the Dales and kill us all" type posts. Furious that builders can go back to work and school children can go back to school in June to "kills us all". People are saying we should have lockdown until there's a vaccine, or until September. All these people on social media either:

• work from home anyway
• run their business from home
• didn't work anyway

AIBU in thinking "yeah it's alright for you!". Some of us need to return to work to keep a living and roof over our heads. I am furloughed until the end of the month but if my workplace can't re-open by around July then my job is basically fucked. I'm a single parent to 2, my ex runs a business that also relies on lockdown being eased, so if he loses his business then I lose maintenance payments.

I think it also shows a woeful misunderstanding of what lockdown is for. It wasn't implemented so that we could stay at home while the virus fairy magicked corona virus away. It was never the expectation that lockdown would solve the virus problem. There will be a second peak - NHS barely survives flu season as it is, it's important that the next peak doesn't coincide with the inevitable flu peak

I could cry when I look at countries like South Korea who are able to live with the virus because they have been so organised. quarantining and questioning those who arrive at airports, tracking and tracing the infection, getting an app up and running quickly. Testing medical staff regularly, tracking temperature.

We've been on lockdown for nearly two months and I can't see what the government has put in place to allow things to function.

It's true this can't carry on indefinitely - that's why the government was supposed to be organising things in preparation for lifting lockdown.

What has changed? What have they put in place? We could have manufactured face masks and they could have been distributed to chemists and they could now insist we wear them.

It's incredibly naive to want the restrictions to ease far too early, what people like you forget is that a second lockdown is not impossible. You also forget that a STRICT lockdown is not out of the cards either.

Of course it IS possible, of course we do have the infrastructures in place to impose it. People said closing schools was unrealistic and would never happen. Clearly, it has happened.

The government has tried to protect the economy by choosing very relaxed guidelines. I am not sure why some people insist on risking a much worst 2nd wave that will force them to become a lot tougher. Many businesses will collapse if that happens. And some of us can't afford that risk.

You might be all right and it works better for you, it's not true for many of us.

people seem to think that there was a change around work. There wasn't, the PM just reiterated that those who are allowed to work outside the home, and have been allowed to work outside the home since lockdown was announced, should do so. The law closing non-essential retail, leisure, hospitality etc still stands
THAT!
and most retails, eateries and businesses places here deliver, the only closed the physical shops...

The trouble is, being scared won’t solve anything. The common cold is a corona virus and we don’t have a vaccine for that after decades of trying.
The population (or at least the stronger majority) have to function without a vaccine or we will all eventually run out of money.

By gradually asking more people to return to work, I think the govt is trying to give people a bit of confidence, and yes, to increase infection rates very slightly so more gain immunity.
There is no other way that I can see.

The problem is that people want to be spoon fed every detail. It’s not actually that hard to grasp the concept that we should still all stay home where possible,take outdoor exercise,go back to work if you can’t work from home and if possible don’t use public transport, and if you still can,work from home.

I read an interesting meme yesterday which said “just because restrictions are being eased doesn’t mean this is over it means there’s space for you in ICU.”

And frankly if countries were going into lockdown to eradicate the virus then they were monumentally stupid. The virus was always going to keep existing, and if they felt the virus would be eradicated by going into lockdown there wouldn’t be research into creating a vaccine,because all they’d have had to do was to put the world in lockdown and it would be gone. It was never going to work like that, although I’ve not read that theory anywhere else but here.

It’s good if you want and need to work this has changed.

The issue for many isn't that lockdown is being very gently lifted. It is that Boris and co need to step up and be honest.

I think September would be a bad time to put everything back, september is when All the cold and flu bugs are around, let alone this new virus.
they need to stagger the returns.

OP, you are guilty of the kind of thinking you accuse others of. Basically only seeing your own situation. You fear adverse financial impact for your self therefore everyone needs to get back to work? Can you imagine that people might be worried about both aspects? Loss of jobs and loss of life? Just because you might be ok dealing with catching the virus, lots of others won't be as lucky.

A) we are still in lockdown
B) Other countries who have managed Covid much better then the UK, with much more effective testing and track and trace measures have seen their R values go above 1 as they reopened schools and started to gradually reopen shops. Why the gov thinks that the UK will be immune from this effect when the Covid approach has been handled appallingly is beyond me..

I agree with you OP.

Those who can go back to work are, I'm sure, happy to do so. There is not an unlimited pot of money - not all workers have been furloughed - not all small businesses are getting handouts.

For those who are in the 'at risk' groups then I can understand the fear but make it so that those people can stay home and avoid mixing with others.

The country will grind to a complete standstill if everyone has to quit working for too much longer.

Although New Zealand has achieved that

They only have a population of about 5 million which probably helped. The U.K. has about 67 million.

It wasn't implemented so that we could stay at home while the virus fairy magicked corona virus away.

This is literally what's happening in New Zealand. They're close to eliminating the virus in the population. I appreciate they have a much smaller population but I think the contrast in approaches is stark and depressing. We've done such a half-baked job.

I'm a SAHP who has a working long hours DH meaning I'm stuck at home with 3 teens, my 3 younger kids and SIL's 3 kids (she's working in ICU so they've been here since schools shut) and my MIL. I would love my house back to myself in the day.

You're exactly the kind of person I'm talking about. You want your house back to yourself. I want to be able to put food in my children's lives. It's alright for you.

Also if you have a child at risk you don't have to put them in school or take them out - it let other people get on with it.

We'd rather people were dead than poor
No we wouldn't - and people will die anyway if they have no money for food

@Ethelfleda

*I agree about people being driven by fear.
They government had to convince people that everyone is at risk to make people stay at home. People wouldn’t stay in lockdown to protect the vulnerable because many are inherently individualistic.
Now, the government will have a hell of a job trying to convince people that actually, it’s relatively safe to start to ease lockdown (not for the vulnerable of course)

Looking forward to seeing them attempt this 180 whilst retaining any shred of credibility*

This is so true. Now you’ve got tens of thousands of younger, healthy adults with no underlying health conditions demanding we stay at home until a cure is found.

It is bonkers

It's not just the risk of starvation Hingeandbracket, which is a tad melodramatic but poverty and austerity absolutely will cost lives. For a start we'll be much less able to provide the support and benefits that allow vulnerable people to stay at home.

What does "stay at home where possible" mean though, in the context of employment contracts and obligations? Stay at home as long as your job can be done exactly as you would do it at work? Stay at home if working means you are closer than two metres from your colleagues? Stay at home unless your employer bleaches communal areas and areas of high traffic every hour? Stay at home unless you travel to work by public transport? What if you work on public transport? Stay at home unless you have a dependent who is shielding or caring responsibilities for a person who is shielding? What about household members who are vulnerable? Do you go to work then? Do you stay at home unless your employer takes everyone's temperature every day? Do you stay at home unless your workplace has mandatory symptom reporting?

And how, in an increasingly casualised and deunionised national workforce, with something like six HSE inspectors per local authority, and in the context of several million newly unemployed, is any of this implimented/negotiated/enforced in order that employee rights, including crucially the right not to be put in danger at work, are protected?

NZ also had time on their side. Lock down was the same date wasn’t it? March 23. This was right at the beginning of their curve and we were already uncontained. It was easier to do this when the rest of the world was doing it. What would our equivalent date have been I wonder.

You're exactly the kind of person I'm talking about. You want your house back to yourself. I want to be able to put food in my children's lives. It's alright for you.

Also if you have a child at risk you don't have to put them in school or take them out - it let other people get on with it.

It's not remotely alright for me. My DH is in one of the jobs hardest hit by cases. If he gets sick or dies we're fucked. If the Tories hadn't cut back so many services and my DD could go to a school that could adequately deal with her condition then I'd still be working.

I want them to do things sensibly and safely so that people don't die. Be that by Covid or by other issues. ATM they are risking people dying from Covid for the sake of big business.

All this lifting is going to do is see a second spike in a few weeks time and we'll all be in the same boat all over again

No we wouldn't - and people will die anyway if they have no money for food

People are not going to be without money for food.

We have a benefits system. It's shit, but it's there.

*implemented

I agree OP, most people's opinions are based on their own circumstances - but isn't it natural?

For me it's not a case of 'alright for you'.

I want lockdown to end.

But I want lockdown ending when it is safe to do so and a reasonable number of the great British public weren't capable of staying at home (you know the ones justifying going to the park, wanting to drive an hour to the beach, nipping to the shops when they want chocolate, starting mumsnet threads asking AIBU to do this thing that's clearly not ok and so on).

When you look at what Boris has said, much of the advice is still the same, but I guarantee you that the nation's idiots will decide this is back to normal, go mixing households, meet up with friends to sunbathe in the park, have play dates, drive long distances to rural or coastal communities and so on. Then there'll be another spike and we'll be back to square one.

Agree re kids back to school too - mine are deeply affected by being off and I'm willing to take the negligibly tiny risk of them getting COVID for the sake of their mental health, which I think people are forgetting matters greatly. But everyone left right and centre is signing petitions to stop schools reopening

Some people just want this to continue working from home/not working on someone else's shilling

That's staggeringly offensive.

My dad is over 70 and has chronic health issues, but is not retired as financially he needs to work. He can't work from home and until now he's been furloughed, but I'm worried that he'll now be told he has to go back to the workplace. If the government and employers don't continue to support him and others who can't safely go back to work, he and they will have to go unpaid. My dad cannot afford to go unpaid and I cannot afford to help him much. He has worked hard for fifty-ish years in a highly socially valuable job.

My DP is self-employed and the nature of his work means there isn't any (hasn't been since March) and may not be any work for him for many months. It could easily be next year. He's applying for the HMRC grant but it won't be much. In his previous line of work he was for many years a higher-rate taxpayer, so lots of people have benefited from his 'shilling' in the past.

How dare you suggest people like this are taking the piss?