Has Covid-19 made you realise just how inherently selfish so many people are?

[Nicknamegoeshere]

It has me.
The world is a mess and most people only really care about themselves and their families.
Fed up to the back teeth of people trying to justify why they can't possibly do X, Y, and or Z.
Just be honest and say "Because I don't really care about passing this virus on, I'm not bothered about those more vulnerable than myself."

Wow @PerveenMistry

So every household should have equal to a years salary saved or else they are self indulgent or shameful for being annoyed at losing their job? What is your profession can I ask? Here in the real world it doesn’t work like that.

Yes, but I also realized that selfishness is a human trait. People will always care more about themselves and their families than the bigger picture.

Someone who might lose their job and home due to the lockdown will care more about that than the thousands who could die of covid, meanwhile someone who is obese will care more about not getting covid than millions of people losing their jobs due to lockdown. It is what it is.

And yes, I could cope for a year if need be.

If this is the case, it’s because you’re immensely privileged but without the brains or guts to own it.

Yes. As can be seen here. All about themselves

[quote Nicknamegoeshere]@ForBlueSkies Are they seriously doing another Eat Out to Help Out?! Madness.[/quote]
They’re thinking about it, or something like it, according to the rolling Telegraph blog:

Rishi Sunak signals plans for winter Eat Out to Help Out after second lockdown

Rishi Sunak has suggested that he is mulling a winter version of the summer's Eat Out to Help Out scheme to help boost the economy after the second national lockdown.

During an interview about the latest GDP figures this morning, the Chancellor was asked if he was planning to dust off the scheme which gave diners 50 per cent off meals, up to £10 per person, from Mondays to Wednesdays throughout August.

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-pfizer-covid-vaccine-lockdown-uk-deaths-cases/

Meanwhile, a week ago:

The treasury’s “eat out to help out” scheme could have directly caused a sixth of new coronavirus case clusters over the summer, new research suggests.

The paper, from Thiemo Fetzer, an economist at the University of Warwick, found that the scheme – in which the government funded discounts on food and non-alcoholic drinks at participating businesses Monday to Wednesday throughout August – was closely linked to an increase in cases over the summer.

Coronavirus spread more rapidly in areas with a lot of participating restaurants, Fetzer found, and infections in those areas slowed after the scheme ended.

www.theguardian.com/business/2020/oct/30/treasury-rejects-theory-eat-out-to-help-out-caused-rise-in-covid

Yes. The way they justify selfishness with callous logic and are fine with it. It's the being fine with it.

Look after number one. Do whats best for you. That's what is clear with a lot of people.

I do think there was a sea change back in the late spring when the news broke about Dominic Cummings and a few other high profile people who did break the rules and were found out. Up to mid May people were on board with the lockdown mostly : I think the media did a good job of explaining why they needed to do it and what it hoped to achieve. Boris went into hospital and I did feel a bit of ' pulling together ' from most folk.
Then it sort of dried up a lot. Now people are becoming more selfish and not thinking of others. A lot more people are skeptical about things. Schools are open still which makes a huge difference to this lockdown.

@TheKeatingFive

And yes, I could cope for a year if need be.

If this is the case, it’s because you’re immensely privileged but without the brains or guts to own it.

No, it's because I've been in the workforce since age 14 and always made a point to live below my means no matter how meagre my income.

@Viviennemary

Look after number one. Do whats best for you. That's what is clear with a lot of people.

Do you not do what's best with you and put your own and your family's needs above those of strangers?

@TheKeatingFive

Livelihoods and mental health would be far better off now if everyone would have adhered to stringent distancing and isolation six months ago.

Honestly, you’re just an idiot if you think we’d be over this is everyone obeyed the ‘roolz’.

It’s a virus. They spread. That’s their one and only job.

In the meantime, we are humans and cannot continue as a race if we lock ourselves away entirely.

Perhaps I should be calling you a ‘whiner’ because you didn’t have the foresight to stock years of canned food supplied to get you through a pandemic.

Well, your way doesn't appear to be working too well, does it now?

But by all means, everyone continue "living life."

@gamerchick

I still can't get over the shield the vulnerable so the rest of us can get in with our lives thing. Chilling.

How the hell is it chilling to allow young and healthy people to keep working and providing for themselves and their family instead of locking them away for a virus that doesn't affect them?

Of all the things I read on this site...

It’s not news to me at all that people are selfish .

"Livelihoods and mental health would be far better off now if everyone would have adhered to stringent distancing and isolation six months ago."

This is an interesting view.

How long would be 'long enough' and how stringent would be 'stringent enough' to have reduced the virus to a low 'enough' level without causing immense damage to livelihoods and mental health?

And what level of virus is low enough to prevent a resurgence? Can it be higher than zero? It was zero just before the original outbreak, after all. And what happens if there is one country somewhere on the planet where the level is higher than zero?

My sons are single and can't afford a house in the area where we live , but they have abided by the rules completely. Ds2 has asthma and he has been very stringent since day one and has been able to wfh.
They are not happy about not seeing their friends etc but they know why they can't do the normal things and accepted it won't be forever. In fact they have handled it better than Dh and I ( although we have obeyed the rules too)
It's not all young people being selfish but the minority will always spoil it for the majority about most things! This isn't any different and lots of people don't agree with the lockdowns.

No, it's because I've been in the workforce since age 14 and always made a point to live below my means no matter how meagre my income.

And how old are you?

What if you’d been made redundant a few years into your career. Would you have had a years savings in reserve then?

"No, it's because I've been in the workforce since age 14 and always made a point to live below my means no matter how meagre my income."

"And how old are you?"

Certainly immature by the sounds of it. Someone who thinks they can plan for everything that might happen to them in life usually is.

Yes Ive noticed people using vulnerable people to emotionally blackmail others while not giving a fuck about them the rest of the time

1000%

Nobody gave one single solitary SHIT about my severely disabled nephew prior to covid. Not one. Now, they are hiding behind people like him to justify their obsession with lockdowns and restrictions and reporting their neighbours.

I cannot abide people trying to describe normal human behaviour as selfish. Everybody prioritises their own family/friends (and of course, themselves) and it is human nature to do so.

@TheKeatingFive

No, it's because I've been in the workforce since age 14 and always made a point to live below my means no matter how meagre my income.

And how old are you?

What if you’d been made redundant a few years into your career. Would you have had a years savings in reserve then?

I'm 55.

Have taken time out of workforce to earn a graduate degree, to freelance, to travel etc from time to time over the years. Single, never had anyone else support me or underwrite any of my expenses since age 17. Zero debt, large savings, my home is completely paid for. It can be done with prudence, planning and delayed gratification.

I am shocked at how few people bother to plan and save.

Affordability of housing has shot up in the last 20 years. If you can't afford to buy you have to spend even more money (you can't afford ) on rent in this bizarre irony.

Also wages have stagnated whilst housing has risen meaning affordability has dropped massively.

So the percentage of income spent on expenses has increased with this being disproportionately higher in the lowest income group (which the graph here doesn't demonstrate as this is an average increase only - for some the percentage is much higher).

But yes, people should just save as hard as you did...

Btw the dividing line between those who can afford and can't falls exactly in 2008. What happened then? can you remember?

Anyone over 40 is usually in a much better position because they were much more likely to have some financial security / bought a house / better job opportunities than those under 40.

I think you are making a rather confused point...

I expect that it is perfectly normal to first care for yourself and your loved ones, that's just basic survival and we only have a finite amount of time and energy to care for and support people.

To suggest you should be able to care about a stranger as much as you might care about your child or your partner is simply nonsensical...

That does not mean you cannot be compassionate towards others though and behave decently, but surely your priority is always towards the people you love and making sure that you can provide for yourself.

I think it is unrealistic to expect people to put everyone else first...

Also, those who disagree with lockdowns are not necessarily 'selfish' and just people who want to have a good time in the pub..

Lockdowns have a negative impact (job losses, mental health, domestic violence, cancelled surgery) that just can't be and should not be ignored and they are not a realistic strategy against the virus long term. I think this point of view needs to be heard too.

As for not caring about the vulnerable, I believe the vulnerable and the elderly should be shielded (although older people should also have a say in this) but not the rest of the population and I fail to see how I can realistically contaminate anyone from these groups if I am outside while they are shielding at home...

The simplistic, binary 'you are either a covidiot or a person who wants to save the vulnerable/the elderly' has to stop...I know vulnerable people who have had their cancer treatment interrupted and an elderly relative who had a nervous breakdown during the first lockdown because of the isolation.

Things are not always that black and white and the self-righteousness of some people is frankly wearing thin...

@PerveenMistry you are smug and privileged. That's it really.

Livelihoods and mental health would be far better off now if everyone would have adhered to stringent distancing and isolation six months ago. 😂

Funniest thing I've heard all year!