Here's an interesting view. Lockdown is actually extremely individualistic and throws the working class under the bus.

[Treesofwood]

twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1309030154837135362?s=09

People all ready to gout how selfish people are for questioning or refusing lockdown, it's all about saving lives, we have to do. It for the good of the vulnerable...

Well here is an opposite view. And I think it is very very true. All the questioning about who is impacted most and why. Those cocooned in their house, incomes protected "its not stuck at home its safe at home" rubbish. Who are lockdowns (local or national) really protecting? Who are actually vulnerable? And vulnerable to covid or destitution?

Oh and If health people needed ventilators they wouldn’t get automatic priority over the vulnerable group of vents were short.

And agree with openlygayexolympicfencer that they are only able to be in the position they are in due to the people they are judging.

You’re right

@OpenlyGayExOlympicFencer

I think the point is that those who are able to safely be at home because of the labour of others ought to acknowledge what a fortunate position that is. There are far too many posts that eg criticise people for sending symptomatic kids into school or continue working themselves, without any recognition that some workers require school to function as childcare in order to keep working, and in all likelihood some of them are engaged in the labour that enables the people criticising them to stay safely at home.

Agreed. Better support (e.g childcare, better quality PPE) for people who work those jobs would mitigate some of the problem - but not all of it.

Would you rather:

1. Be infected with Covid and have zero financial worries (job loss, mortgage default etc)

or

1. Not be infected with Covid but face a high probability of losing your job/house?

I reckon most would choose 1.

@Pixxie7 if it was your life or your finances you'd choose you life. But for most people, it isn't their life.

Would you choose to lose your job, your home, ruin your child's education and mental health. To save the life of a person you didn't know?

It's human nature. People seem to be shocked that I would prioritise my own DS's needs over strangers but surely most people would.

I'm happy to live with mask wearing, social distancing and limiting non essential contact but I won't support a full lockdown with schools and businesses forced to close again.

Someonetakemeback I really do not understand why they split every hospital into hot and cold rather than designating actual hospitals into covid or non covid including private. If they can write a law to make it illegal to see your family they can write a law to take private hospitals under government control. But that would involve people losing money...

Wealthy people losing money that should say . Noone seems to care about ordinary people losing money.

I agree OP. The middle classes don't get it and probably don't want to get it.

Noone seems to care about ordinary people losing money

What a dumb thing to think. There are far more ordinary people than wealthy people and I'm sure they all care about potentially losing income.

@Treesofwood this is the problem currently there is no way to only shield vulnerable and allow the virus to spread as
Vulnerable. There would need to be a serious overhaul for this to happen. As it stands I will most likely lose my job because I will need to stay home with vulnerable daughter. In my position i obviously would choose daughters health. I know not everyone is in the same position.

Someonetakemeback Ventilators were never the best thing anyway. The best thing was some sort if machine where the blood is oxygenated outside of the body and pumped back in or something. I think they were used a lot in Genany hence their markedly better outcomes. Pretty sure certain people here would have also got the special treatment

An answer to this would be a universal payment- if the government gave every citizen a certain amount each month during this then they wouldn’t have missed out 3 million self-employed people, and everyone working on the front line would get that as a bonus, so would be earning more during all this.

Everyone in my immediate friend groups life has been massively impacted by coronavirus, and none of it is our health. We’ve all either lost or are clinging on to our jobs dearly.

Hospitality, live events, theatre production, wedding planning, hairdressing and retail.

People braying for further lockdowns/restrictions while the government tell us our jobs simple aren’t ‘viable’ and there’s no more help. Every day I wake up filled with even more gloom.

I will be dropping to carers allowance so going from 32,000 a year to 64.00 a week, of shielding comes back in, lose all respite again and be doing 24 hour care. If shielding the vulnerable and allowing the virus to spread is an option they really need to sort the shielding arrangement out.

Someonetakemeback I really hope that you don't lose your job. There has never been enough support for parents of seriously ill children. I have a few friends/family who have had to give up their jobs to look after their seriously ill children. Pre covid no one in the government actually cared. There was no furlough, or understanding about the lack of appropriate childcare, SeISs or whatever it is called for them
No loans that they don't have to pay back for ten years.

@Porcupineinwaiting

Noone seems to care about ordinary people losing money

What a dumb thing to think. There are far more ordinary people than wealthy people and I'm sure they all care about potentially losing income.

I think ordinary people generally care about losing income themselves. Doesn't follow that they'll give a shit about it happening to other ordinary people. I wouldn't go so far as to say nobody cares but there are plenty who are very comfortable with other people experiencing a great deal of financial pain.

Duffeldaisy It would certainly have been fairer, and much simpler to do the universal payment. But that is so far away from the tory mindset that they couldn't have done it even if they believed it to be best.

@Treesofwood the issue is that not all shielders are 80 and retired there is many who have full time jobs so if we allow the busier to spread and shield the vulnerable then they need to be protected to money and work wise.

@HMSSophie

I think the delivery people who bring my goods to my door, as I sit comfortably and safely in my home doing my MC wfh, are exposed to a shitload more people in the course of their day than I am. Covid has absolutely revealed the social inequality in the UK and it's a fucking disgrace.

Very well said . I’m extremely fortunate to be able to WFH in a relatively secure job and live in a nice area . I’m doing what I can to help those less fortunate around me .. donating etc .

Probably being controversial saying this but I’m disgusted at the attitude of the majority of people I come into contact with in my area ...

Much muttering about how unfair it is that they can’t go abroad on each of the school holidays... Easter , summer half term etc ...

They have no clue or seem to care about how much some people are struggling right now ..

Such inequality... it’s a scandal

Porcupineinwaiting There are plenty of people on here who think people who won't get paid to stay home with their child isolating should just suck it up. Or use their non existent savings. Obviously the person themselves cares about the situation, and saying noone was an exaggeration. Some people do care. But more people appear to care most about stamping out covid, whilst enjoying their extra time at home, and thousands saved in commuting and childcare. .

For those saying about people they don’t know, it’s just as well our armed forces don’t think like that. They put their lives on the line to protect the country.

Trussell Trust are estimating an additional 667,000 people will be destitute between October-December this year. Not a bit skint but as per Joseph Rowntree Foundation: ‘Destitution means going without the bare essentials we all need. That’s a home, food, heating, lighting, clothing, shoes and basic toiletries.’

People are not all in the same boat. Many were under huge pressure before covid hit. Many of the lowest paid, those in insecure work, are the same people enabling others to stay at home.

Those 670,000 are part of the vulnerable.

It has amazed me, although it shouldn't have really, how many people are incapable of understanding that there are individuals who simply cannot keep eating if they can't work. As in, no savings and nobody they can borrow money from. Does Not Compute.