If you are against the lockdown policy, what is your alternative?

[cheeseismydownfall]

I'm sure we all agree that lockdown is truly shit for so many reasons - the long term economic impact on the country and individuals, the knock on impact on other critical aspects of health care, the damage to children's education, the mental health crisis. I know many people feel very uncomfortable about the civil liberty aspect of lockdown. And I completely understand that many people are deeply angry with how the situation was handled, and feel that we would be in a better place now if the government had taken different decisions.

But for those of you who are 'anti lockdown' - what is the alternative, now we are in the position we are in? We saw after Christmas what will happen to the NHS if there is no effort made to check transmission. It will be overwhelmed. And the impact to society if the NHS fails seems pretty scary to me.

Shielding the elderly and vulnerable isn't practical in reality because of intergenerational dependence, so I think that is off the cards.

The only other option would seem to be utterly ruthless about triage, which would see covid patients left to die in their homes - forcibly restrained there if need be. That to me is the stuff of nightmares.

So what are the other options? This is not a goady post - I am genuinely interested in how other people would approach this.

How insightful @Fridget

The lockdown will end. So will furlough. Folk will have to get their heads round that.

@Hellscape

Continue to vaccinate the elderly and vulnerable, then open up, as surely the hospitalisation rates should be much lower then?

This

Would you be happy to make the decisions on who lives and dies then Electra? Who are you to decide that someone else should make that decision?

People don’t seem to fully understand that the reason for the lockdowns was to prevent hospitals being overrun and people dying without treatment (not only from Covid) including younger people with their whole lives ahead of them. We are supposed to be a civilised society after all.

The Nightingale Hospitals weren’t used as there were not enough staff unsurprisingly. You can hardly train hundreds of new doctors and nurses in a few months and we couldn’t recruit from abroad could we?

The issue with it are self evident to anyone in the real world.

For starters with what money are you going to do that DameFanny? Your “one off windfall tax” - how much are you expecting to raise? The 300 billion we have spent on lockdown? In addition to the fucking massive pre-existing national debt?

By what legal route are you going to recoup billions the PPE/test and trace? Have you seen the contracts to conclude these private companies are in breach?

Investing in anything at all will be a non-starter because there is already no money, even assuming this is the last lockdown (which it might not be if there is literally no alternative).

How quickly can these houses be built with the money you’ve found? To house the thousands of families who will be living in temporary accommodation (often a single room B and B) for years because even pre-covid social housing couldn’t cope with demand, and there are thousands of people who will be evicted as soon as the covid moratorium on evictions is over.

Lockdown will cause severe long term harms which simply cannot be cured. I cannot believe you’ve come on and said you’ll build some houses so it’ll be fine.

What are your ideas then? Which economists are you reading?

Anyway, the point of the thread is what do people against lockdowns think we should be doing instead. I'm still interested.

who will build the houses? or do you mean its ok for some folk to be out & about while we cower indoors?

@whatisthislifesofullofcare I'm not talking about during lockdown now am I?

I honestly would like to know anywhere where the "Great" Batshit Barrington declaration has worked
It's the only alternative people are suggesting and it's a crock of crap

I would honestly like to know how and why people get so angry towards any suggestion that does not include lockdown

1 in 70 Swedes has long covid now apparently. Yay for the Swedish approach...

Right going back to the beginning. Short, sharp lockdown to get things in order.

Get Track and Trace working properly. Provide full pay for anyone needing to SI, funded by government.

In full lockdown many are not working, vulnerable or not, provide full support for those needing to shield - no loss of pay, access to deliveries etc, those who are able to do the jobs outside them home, do them, those who can't do the stuff needed at home. Teachers the same, those at home do the online for children not in (SI, choice to be kept home).

There has to be a middle ground between "everyone" at home and opening everything up and shoving certain people away.

@TheChip

I would honestly like to know how and why people get so angry towards any suggestion that does not include lockdown

Too many people don't realise that they're proposing a eugenic approach? People don't like their/their loved ones being treated as disposable? People are tired of being told that lockdown is worse than unrestrained transmission? People are tired of anti-science anti-maskers spouting shit generally?

@DameFanny

1 in 70 Swedes has long covid now apparently. Yay for the Swedish approach...

Isn't UK 10% so not sure we are better off in that regards.

Lockdown will cause severe long term harms which simply cannot be cured.

The pandemic will cause severe long term harms which cannot be cured.

The problem is that some people think there must be a way to fix things, if only “they”would make different decisions.

Well, sadly, right now the only thing to do is to see this wretched "lockdown" (vomits at the word) through until levels become manageable, as the government have painted themselves into a corner by promising to eradicate covid, "whatever it takes". But as soon as things start to ease, the focus must be not on prohibition, but allowing things to operate safely, and helping the public who have been totally shafted by lockdown, especially young people. And then instead of spending billions on furlough, the government must instead turn their billions to training medical staff, so that those costly white elephants of Nightingale Hospitals can be put to use to prevent future extremely damaging lockdowns.

And we need a new government, one that doesn't dither, lie, bluff and gaslight the public every time they speak (cloud cuckoo land, I know). The Boris brand has become well and truly toxic: he is the personification of U-turns, self-interest, deception, indecision, incompetence, and comedy which is fine for Have I Got News for You, but not for Downing Street. I've always said general elections should be more frequent, anyway. Politicians are like nappies: they should be changed regularly, and for the same reason; and if they deceive the public on a massive scale, they should be imprisoned, like Tony Blair should have been. Politicians rarely, if ever, face the music for their lies. Some people will never trust government again, with anything after this. (For me, that ship sailed with Tony Blair's lies about weapons of mass destruction.)

Can't be 10% of the population - maybe 10% of those who've had it?

Prioritising children also means protecting all the adults they depend upon though from nurses, teachers, parents, grandparents etc.

wanderings: wherefore art thou, new government?
I can’t see anyone with hood ideas just waiting to be elected.

@yearinyearout

To be honest, I thought what we had in tier 3 was going fine. Bars and cafes still allowed to open, only mixing outdoors with people not in your household etc. No large gatherings. Would have allowed businesses to stay open without much of a detrimental effect on numbers. Our local bar had a lovely outdoor area with patio heaters and I miss it 🥲

I think as infection rates have dropped so dramatically this is what we should be.

Just enough socialising to keep business going and give us enough interaction (for those that want it).

I generally believe if we had the economy fully open but with the covid measures and social distancing in place like before and allowed people to take personal responsibility in their actions, who they socialise with etc it would not be the doom situation sage predicted (which never happened)

Would I go to a mass gathering no. Would I go to a friends house yes...

@McCheney73 did you miss the wave we've just had? More than 100,000 deaths? Or have I totally misread your post?

[quote ExpulsoCorona]@McCheney73 did you miss the wave we've just had? More than 100,000 deaths? Or have I totally misread your post?[/quote]
Of course not.

This is terrible absolutely.

However like myself and many others I know who's mental health and other health care has seriously gone to poo it's how I feel.

I wasn't clear in my first post
Go back to September and October and look at their predictions. Tier 4 actually started working before lockdown.

Yes hospitals need protecting. I have so much respect for the NHS but it's been poorly funded for years and of course this has damaged the running of it. Not enough was done to help the running of them.

I know someone who works for them and only now they are training staff to help on covid wards/other areas.

If I could I would help them.

@TheChip

I would honestly like to know how and why people get so angry towards any suggestion that does not include lockdown

Because you can’t give relevant examples of where it’s worked