To think the govt has no right to tell me who I'm allowed to have in my home?

[HumanFemale1]

Anyone else feels the same? I just don't think this is OK. Govt making the rules of who I am allowed to have in my home or how many people I'm allowed to have in...

Especially when it's to keep a virus from spreading when the average death of a virus is higher than the life expectancy. But for any reason really. If the govt was making this rule for any other reason people would be horiffied.

@JinglingHellsBells

What I hate about these threads is the pseudo-superior tone of the rule breakers.

The implication that people following the rules are thick.
That we don't understand.
That we are sheep.

That we are not educated and intelligent people.

It's funny, because I was reading and thinking how well articulated the majority of rule followers are compared to the tin foil hat wearers and rule breakers.

Someone replied to something I said upthread and the amount of question marks they put almost outweighed the characters from their reply. I can't even begin to reply to something like that as my head hurt.

From the people I know personally (especially family) those who are willing to lockdown and follow the rules, going above and beyond, seem to be the better educated/higher intellectuals. The majority of people who "want to see mum" are the ones who are not necessarily stupid or uneducated but of a lower level.

@HumanFemale1

Anyone else feels the same? I just don't think this is OK. Govt making the rules of who I am allowed to have in my home or how many people I'm allowed to have in...

Especially when it's to keep a virus from spreading when the average death of a virus is higher than the life expectancy. But for any reason really. If the govt was making this rule for any other reason people would be horiffied.

Get a fucking grip and educate yourself.

I find the intolerance of Covid deaths, compared to the quite high acceptance (comparatively) of cancer deaths/RTA deaths (just plucking two examples) prior to the pandemic very interesting.

There is so much we could have done over the years to minimise cancer deaths. But we didn’t, because of cost, or the impact they’d have on our way of life (the irony).

And that’s before even getting started on the many preventable developing world deaths that would only take a bit of money thrown at them to sort.

The cognitive dissonance here raises many questions.

@DappledOliveGroves

I wish everyone who was so obsessed with staying alive at all costs would stay home, shut the windows and never cross their threshold. If you think staying alive at all costs is the most important thing on earth then quit your jobs if you can't work from home, sod the mortgage. If the be all and end all is immortality then surely it matters not if you lose jobs or lose the house. Meanwhile, let the rest of us get on with life.

Sure, if I live a long and prosperous life, that's great. But if I don't, then I doubt in 100 years time people will be weeping and wailing over my death. In the grand scheme of things, I'm irrelevant.

Life without liberty is not, IMO, real life. I don't think the measure of a successful life is simply living to 80+ years. Some people cram a wonderful life into a relatively short span. We don't know what's round the corner. A third to half of us will be diagnosed with cancer during our lives yet we don't see people renouncing red meat, alcohol or avoiding obesity. Pollution kills tens of thousands but cars aren't banned. Poverty and poor mental health kills millions, yet we don't campaign against it.

The NHS may be overwhelmed? It's been fucked for years and I would welcome a wholly new system since it's abundantly clear that our healthcare system, compared to the French, German, Swiss or Australian is a poor relation.

The world has faced pandemics, natural disasters and wars since time began. I'm damned if I should give up my liberty for something that cannot be controlled.

Thats fine. But when you are dying in pain and the NHS turns you or your family away then thats also fine, you can watch them die in front of you or you might be lucky and they might not. When your relatives are seriously ill after catching it from you, you won't have any regrets cause you wanted to live your life.

I worry too OP. Not that I’m breaking the rules but suddenly we will find a particularly bad flu season in a few years time and hey presto, we will be locked down. Once there’s a precedent for something...

I’ll tell you something else that has concerned me over the last few years and is evident on this thread, there’s no room for debate, for discussion any more. People shut others’ down with increasing regularity. That scares me. The echo chamber gets ever louder.

Yanbu. I also don't understand the whole " carry on breaking the rules but don't use the NHS if you catch it" argument. Does that also apply to the millions of people who smoke all their lives and get lung cancer or obese people who end up very ill with diabetes and cost the NHS millions? Are they not entitled to health care either then?

@Fortherosesjoni70 omg the way you had to reference @DappledOliveGroves self or family possibly being affected, God forbid olivegroves would care about anyone they didn't know personally being affected via community transmission. It's just so sad the lack of compassion and caring on display here.

I agree with you OP. I've been following the rules but I find this scary. It feels like the government is overreaching.

I did break the law last weekend. I went to my sister to help her clear her 'depression cave', aka her room. She lives with my mum so we can't bubble. I would do it again in a heartbeat.

I don’t get the what about smoking etc argument. It implies people think they should be able to use NHS if they need it. But by doing whatever they like the chances are that care will be compromised.

there’s no room for debate, for discussion any more. People shut others’ down with increasing regularity. That scares me. The echo chamber gets ever louder.

This.

@DelilahfromDevon I completely agree with you. The contempt on this thread is shocking.

We saw similar contemptuous attitudes on the Brexit threads.

It's all about shouting down the other side now. No room for civil discussion or rational debate.

@TheKeatingFive, that’s exactly it: the inconsistency over which diseases matter and which don’t. Every year in the U.K. over two million people are living with cancer, and their immune system is often weak. We don’t lock down to prevent spread of colds, flu, chickenpox, even though they could be serious to some people.

We have been told to protect the NHS. I am interested to know how posters think it will survive the forthcoming depression, with productivity and tax take severely down. I would like to be wrong but I don’t think it will continue.

Wildswim what would your preferred approach be?

The reason there is contempt is you have 1 side where people are abiding by the law to try and keep them and others safe, then you have the other side where people's main focus is continuing their life how they want to live it.

The issue with the law and virus itself is for those who chose to follow the rules we risk being infected by those who are not following, for those not following, I understand it SUCKS, I don't want to not see my family, but I also don't want to get infected by 1 of you and give it to them either or vice versa...

Its not forever, even if you are happy to take the risk it doesn't mean everyone you come into contact with is

That bothers me too @TheKeatingFive. Heart disease is the biggest killer worldwide around 15 million a year I believe.
And for those saying if you break lockdown you shouldn't get nhs treatment, what about those who drink, smoke, take drugs? What about over weight people?

I'm not for one second saying those people shouldn't receive nhs treatment of course they should.

I actually feel this lockdown is fairer in regards to children still being in school and the fact that single adult households can have a support bubble and childcare support bubbles. I think the rule of six was ridiculous though. Scotland's one other household was more sensible and I think something along that line from the start, where people chose a support person/household and you only had contact with them would have made more sense in reducing transmission.

@Mumtwoboys90

Yanbu. I also don't understand the whole " carry on breaking the rules but don't use the NHS if you catch it" argument. Does that also apply to the millions of people who smoke all their lives and get lung cancer or obese people who end up very ill with diabetes and cost the NHS millions? Are they not entitled to health care either then?

Overeating and smoking aren't currently against the law. If they were, it would be trickier. A better comparison would be heroin overdoses.

Either way, if you are on a transplant list and you drink alcohol or similar, you are removed from the transplant list and it goes to someone who did follow the rules. This would be a better likeness. You are told not to meet Sue down the road indoors for a natter and a cuppa. If you invite Sue and she brings coronavirus to your door, you shouldn't have priority of healthcare over someone who has followed the rules but a stranger passed it onto them at their weekly shop.

I know this isn't going to change your mind. I don't think anyone will change their minds about coronavirus and the rules. But oh well.

Look, to all those saying "it's not about me" - well, very sadly, it just is.
It's not about you or your friends and family who are all well and strong. It's about how you and they might spread the virus to other people,ESPECIALLY to careworkers and other poorly-paid but essential people who make your comfortable 'deliver-on-time' lives possible.

By all means be libertarian but just be decent and for God's sake honest and take the consequences. If you can do without supporters of any possible way, shape or kind, then go ahead, and don't expect anyone to help you.

But you know what? Because we live in a country with a remarkable - not perfect, but remarkable - free NHS and countless decent, hard-working, kindly people (many of who just have to turn up for their work, whatever the danger, to feed their families or for fear that they might become unemployed), you can afford to risk all their lives and posture as freedom-loving. Do you understand this?
It really is rather sickening.

@ffsonly46

Watch the early episodes of The Handmaid's Tale and reflect on the bit where June talks about "sleep walking" into the government's plan.

Can you please explain to me what the plan is? I have asked on a few threads for an explanation when people have made vague comments about government plans or a new world order or "it's all about control" and so far nobody has explained what they mean.

@HumanFemale1
If the govt was making this rule for any other reason people would be horiffied.

They might be, it would depend on the reason. Most of us are capable of distinguishing between when something like this is beneficial and justified, and when it isn't.

I can't imagine the person posting is genuinly trolling! It's an annoying comment however I will explain this to OP without seeming like a bully.

My brother is a doctor and my two nieces. My eldest neice has two daughters, 3 year old and 1 year old. She did not see them during the first lockdown as she was working on the respiratory ward. She wanted to keep her daughters safe, her sister stayed with her as she also worked on the wards. Their dad had a heart attack. They couldn't visit anyone. He couldn't have surgery, he was sent home with a blocked artery, because there were no ventilators !

My sister was in pieces. I have a sister who has a lung condition and is on immusuppressants.

If she gets it, she would pretty much die. Her sons are at school and her daughter is a teacher. They HAVE TO continue with school because its necessary. The government has made decisions to keep these very people all around the country SAFE. If people continue to visit each other, and there was no control over mixing, it would be chaos for people like my nieces who have left their whole life to work. For people like my sister who is struggling alone.

The more contact you have with people the more likelihood there is of the virus spreading. For example of I go visit my friend at number 10, and she is infected...then I go visit my sister who has a lung condition and I have caught it from my friend at number 10, my sister will get it and most likely die. Now if everyone did that we would drop like flies most likely or at least cause chaos in the nhs. The nhs would have to cancel serious treatments like cancer and heart surgeries.

Plesse think before you decide it's all a ruse!

We live in a democracy and it is absolutely right that we should question and debate what is happening. Just because the govt imposes rules doesn’t make it right and it also doesn’t mean that people have to STFU and do it blindly. Like vaccinations, it’s a topic that as a voting citizen of this country you have the right to question.

@MSG92

That is a false dilemma. The world doesn't just consist of people following the rules perfectly and careless idiots.

YANBU

If you’re not bothered about catching covid then fine, whatever but it’s not you who I’m bothered about really- it’s the people you could pass it onto and it’s also the NHS staff who might have to care for your sorry ass if it makes you seriously ill.