Would you support a new English lockdown?

[demitrimendeleev1]

Just that really
Yabu- I wouldn’t
Yanbu- I would

@MercyBooth

Yes the elephant in the room is ppl not being able to afford to self isolate.

Absolutely.

My M and S this morning had at least half the people well over retirement age couple shopping as though nothing was different

How utterly shocking, I’m appalled. They had just as much right to be there as you.

I've said yes so they close the shops and save me from January sales. No other reason 🤣🤣

No not at all, what have the previous lockdowns achieved. Jack shit.

They are the most at risk. That is why I am so worried about them.

@Gobbeldegook

I've said yes so they close the shops and save me from January sales. No other reason 🤣🤣

You and 739 others

I think I would support it as long as there are systems in place for financial hardship. We would be okay for a while so much luckier than lots of other people.

However, I have issues with schools, colleges being open so dc going out and dh needing to shield. It’s hard to get a balance...

Be grateful for gruel Gals.

Look, if we ban chocolate then... we should ban Netflix too -- right? I mean that's not necessary. Neither are beers, Nintendo Switch, jigsaw puzzles, mobile phones, guttering, car tyres, evening news... elections or electricity. Honestly, folk don't know they're born. Be grateful as long as you have some gruel.

@HelloDaisy

I think I would support it as long as there are systems in place for financial hardship. We would be okay for a while so much luckier than lots of other people.

However, I have issues with schools, colleges being open so dc going out and dh needing to shield. It’s hard to get a balance...

But can we actually afford any of that?

No not at all, what have the previous lockdowns achieved.

What do you expect them to achieve?

They achieved a slow down in infection rates and a reduction in deaths. Which is what they were designed to achieve.

@Almostslimjim

No not at all, what have the previous lockdowns achieved.

What do you expect them to achieve?

They achieved a slow down in infection rates and a reduction in deaths. Which is what they were designed to achieve.

At what cost?

But can we actually afford any of that?

Depends what you mean by "afford". We can "afford" trident, hs2, free meals and 11% pay rises for MPs...

@Bathroom12345

They are the most at risk. That is why I am so worried about them.

You’re not even slightly worried about them, you’re pissed off because they’re not doing why you think they should. You want them locked away so you can do as you like.

Would be fine for me personally if schools closed- I am a teacher and managed looking after my daughter (shared with DH) and working from home last time. I mean it was hard but manageable hard. We had good home school provision in place. We have been letting our daughter do every possible permitted activity when virus levels low so that she has nice experiences in case we do end up housebound again.

Only if it was short and sharp total lockdown don't leave the house at all and properly enforced so it worked. Not dragging on for ages with everyone breaking the rules and continually extended.

But I'm more worried about it from the pov of the economy. I just don't think we can afford it anymore, however bad it gets.

At what cost?

And at what cost would letting it run rampant?

There's a cost either way. We don't see the cost of the road not travelled, we never do.

@Almostslimjim

But can we actually afford any of that?

Depends what you mean by "afford". We can "afford" trident, hs2, free meals and 11% pay rises for MPs...

But can we actually afford any of that?

We could afford dine out to help out just fine, look what good that did us.

If we can't afford to help people self isolate for two weeks aside from a measly £500 for very few people, how can we afford lockdowns?

If schools close I'll have to give up work

“Lockdown is great... until we have to pay for it”.

With their habit of telling us absolutely nothing, the government has said very little about the cost of their wonderful lockdown. The financial cost will be HUGE - it will take years if not decades for our children to pay off, but they’re leaving it to the next government that has to clear up the mess to tell us that. I’ve listed other obvious costs of lockdown above.

And yet, people keep baying for more destructive lockdown, and the government keep brainwashing - sorry, I meant persuading us to accept more and more of this damaging rhetoric. When they decide it’s time to reverse the scaremongering, they might have a hard job persuading people to go back to work, having conditioned them so well.

@wanderings

Lockdown doesn't cost anything. The government can simply print money to fund it.

Saving lives is far more important in any event.

Aaah yes saving lives. Lives we then send back to no job, no home, no money, no follow up care etc

But go ahead pat yourself on the back fir being so amazing not your responsibility once they "saved" then are they

I don't want a lockdown but I can't see another option, so yes, I would support it. All those people saying previous lockdowns didn't achieve anything - look at the graphs. Previous lockdowns massively reduced the spread. We need to keep reducing the spread until the vaccine programme is far enough rolled out that we can cope with the virus in "normal" mode.

No, unless the Army policed it and borders are closed. Otherwise it’s ineffective long and painful.

Lockdown doesn't cost anything. The government can simply print money to fund it.

Yes, if it was an actual lockdown.
These tiers are fucking ridiculous. Either we're in lockdown or we're not.

@Quaagars

Yes, if it was an actual lockdown. These tiers are fucking ridiculous. Either we're in lockdown or we're not.

But surely you can accept that some areas need it more than others the uk is a big nation why force areas with low cases to lockdown as well as ones with high cases?