Why are we not in lockdown right now?!

[InkyPinkyParlezVous]

If things are as bad as they say, why are we not locking down right now?

Surely waiting til after Christmas is just too late to stop this "tidal wave"

@BoredZelda

because we can't afford it

Hideous that people will suggest we can’t afford to do what is necessary to stop a global pandemic.

because most people are sensible enough to mitigate the risk without an authoritarian government forcing them to

I think this has been proven to be largely untrue.

A global pandemic cannot be stopped. Lockdowns or "circuit breakers" will have no effect and are pointless. At best they just kick the can down the road. They are also hideously expensive and cannot be put into place without financial backing like furlough.

Boris didn't even have the support of his own back benchers to get his plan B through parliament, much less further restrictions, circuit breakers and the return of furlough. I am no Tory, but for once I am with the back benchers on this. People need to run their businesses and earn their living.

And also it’s quite a bit easier to say fund this than to deal with keeping the funds coming in

@WheelieBinPrincess

Because not everyone is losing their heads at all this bloody hype, thankfully.

Although plenty are, and some are revelling in it.

This response is spot on.

As a side note I'm really interested in the story behind your username 🤣

@Mojoj

God that's all we need - more hysteria. Here's an idea - away in your house, lock the door, barricade the windows and make sure you stay put. And give everyone else peace.

👏👏👏

Lockdown wouldn’t even reduce cases

So you’d be stuck in a rising case scenario - when would end point be

A lockdown that doesn't work even to reduce cases is a political disaster. How do you back out of that?

How is one medium sized country shutting restaurants and banning 'mixing' going to stop a 'global' pandemic?

In our own nation? It will do quite a bit. But the point is, to say we can’t afford to pay to keep our own people safe is laughable. When people say “we can’t afford it” what they mean is “why should I pay for those who are struggling financially” It is rarely those who needed government support during the pandemic who asked how it could be afforded.

Nicola Sturgeon is hamstrung by the politics in Westminster.

She really isn’t.

Until the U.K. government provide the funding for furlough etc, Nicola Sturgeon can't call a lockdown.

She can. She can provide the support from her own reserves. She chooses not to do that.

My reply to that is always that of course you can't go to things that are closed. But I will see my family anyway, come what may.

Unless everyone who doesn’t give a shit has a massive family then only going to see them is still going to mean a drop in numbers.

Anyway, if they don't bring back furlough or any form of financial support then how can they introduce such measures. People can't live on thin air.

Has there been any suggestion that any future lockdown would be without support?

By allowing this many infections we create the hospital admissions that will lead to one.

And will still result in people not being able to access health services when they need it.

Our whole standard of living is based on having a relatively strong economy

Jesus, people still aren’t getting it. No matter what you do, lockdown or not, the economy will be affected by Covid. It is either because businesses are closed, or it is because businesses are decimated with people not being able to work or take their custom there because of illness or isolating. You can’t choose between covid and the economy. Covid always wins.

And of course the idea that we can "stop a global pandemic", particularly with omicron, is flawed anyway.

Yeah, no point in trying really. Might as well just decide it’s all too hard and not bother trying to reduce it’s impact on our Country.

Lockdowns or "circuit breakers" will have no effect and are pointless. At best they just kick the can down the road.

Again, completely missing the point. Lockdowns only “kick the can down the road” if they are used in isolation with no proper process for coming out of it. And, in this situation, kicking the can down the road to a point where we aren’t in the winter bug season isn’t a bad idea. Numbers like we have now would be far less damaging if it were mid summer.

@BoredZelda

Lockdowns or "circuit breakers" will have no effect and are pointless. At best they just kick the can down the road.

Again, completely missing the point. Lockdowns only “kick the can down the road” if they are used in isolation with no proper process for coming out of it. And, in this situation, kicking the can down the road to a point where we aren’t in the winter bug season isn’t a bad idea. Numbers like we have now would be far less damaging if it were mid summer.

How long are you thinking

So lockdown over winter - 2 to 3 months?

release and what sort of measures to control omicron?

if they are used in isolation with no proper process for coming out of it.

But what are those processes?

What country culturally comparable to the U.K. has succeeded in doing anything other than lock down, open up, cases shoot right up again?

Also might be worth considering how long boosters give extra protection before delaying

In our own nation? It will do quite a bit.

You didn't mention 'doing quite a bit'. You talked about 'stopping a global pandemic'. Lockdown can't come even close to achieving that.

When people say “we can’t afford it” what they mean is “why should I pay for those who are struggling financially”

No. They mean why destroy the economy repeatedly for increasingly diminishing returns.

It is rarely those who needed government support during the pandemic who asked how it could be afforded.

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? Either it can be afforded or it can't. People's individual perspectives make no odds.

Maybe you'd care to tell us where all this money for repeated rolling lockdowns is coming from?

You didn't mention 'doing quite a bit'. You talked about 'stopping a global pandemic'. Lockdown can't come even close to achieving that.

Yes, there was a lot of goalpost moving in that post!

@BoredZelda
We’ll the economic damage is a matter of degree. There is no way in which 100% of hospitality being closed by lockdowns is better economically than some smaller percentage being closed due to staff sickness (and a lot of staffing issues are caused by isolation requirements rather than sickness anyway).

@BoredZelda

It's my understanding that Nicola Sturgeon is using £100million from her reserves to support the hospitality industry currently, but that's nowhere near enough to provide furlough across several industries for the several months lockdowns usually last.

[quote IWannaWishYouANutNutsChristmas]@BoredZelda

It's my understanding that Nicola Sturgeon is using £100million from her reserves to support the hospitality industry currently, but that's nowhere near enough to provide furlough across several industries for the several months lockdowns usually last. [/quote]
No. It’s not

Because boris a. Doesn’t want to pay for furlough (letting the companies go bust anyway is apparently preferable) and b. Doesn’t want to be the pm who cancels Christmas twice

@Frazzled2207

Because boris a. Doesn’t want to pay for furlough (letting the companies go bust anyway is apparently preferable) and b. Doesn’t want to be the pm who cancels Christmas twice

For a) it’s really is paying

And b) do you want Christmas cancelled?

There are other mitigations that can be used rather than a full lock down - where I am we have obligatory homeworking, schools closing early for Xmas, regulations on closing times and table sizes in bars and restaurants, clear messages to reduce social interaction, compulsory masks in schools, shops, public transport. Numbers are currently going down rather than increasing. Of course we don't know with Omicron but at least starting from a better place where they are actually doing something.

@MissAmbrosia

There are other mitigations that can be used rather than a full lock down - where I am we have obligatory homeworking, schools closing early for Xmas, regulations on closing times and table sizes in bars and restaurants, clear messages to reduce social interaction, compulsory masks in schools, shops, public transport. Numbers are currently going down rather than increasing. Of course we don't know with Omicron but at least starting from a better place where they are actually doing something.

Bars and restaurants simply aren't viable at reduced numbers of customers. Likewise sporting events, theatres, etc. There's a reason that they cram as many people in as possible - if they didn't, there's simply no point in opening at all.

Given the utter shit show of the UK government at the moment compliance with another Christmas lockdown would be extremely low. Plus we’re in a very different position now than we were a year ago with the vast majority being double jabbed and the most vulnerable having had the booster as well.

And the clown running the country doesn’t want to be the bad guy by cancelling Christmas, also doesn’t want to stump up cash for furlough again, which would be needed if industries are closed.

The Tories prefer to make vague suggestions of caution without actually making it a rule so they don’t have to support the affected industries and don’t face the backlash.

We are not in lockdown because at the moment, there hasn't been a surge in hospitalisations. There could be, but there also quite likely wont be.

Omicron is likely to be milder, and when weighing up the effects of a full lockdown over Christmas on;

• Retail and hospitality, who would lose a bunch of their xmas revenue at one of their typically busy periods

• The public's mental health as a whole

it has been deduced that Plan B + boosters is enough for now, and IMO, that's the right call.

I'm with Frazzled.

@Nellodee

I'm with Frazzled.

Would you cancel Christmas Nellodee?

Boris will announce it right after the Queen's speech!

Seriously, if there are going to be 1 million cases by next week and the vaccine has brought down the percentage that need medical help from 22% to 6%, that means there will 60,000 people needing medical help by next week.

Currently there are 7569 patients in hospital and they are on the highest level alert now.

That means by Christmas Day it will be very hard to be admitted for any reason. People may well get turned away.

We have to lockdown to stop that happening. The govt are taking an enormous (irresponsible imo) gamble that Omicron will be milder - even though all the scientists I've heard have cautioned against that very thing.

People will welcome lockdown if it turns out that they won't get treatment if they or their loved ones need it. I suspect we'll all be on here clamouring for it very soon

I guess they will hope that a percentage of people will cut contacts down and so reduce overall case numbers a bit. The cases are rises and so are the hospitalisations so when they reach a critical level routine operations/check ups etc will be cancelled but that's a price many who are not on waiting lists or healthy at the moment are happy to take.

Personally I don't think we would ever lockdown to the extent that we did before because people won't do it. I think they are just hoping numbers fall if enough people stop mixing for a bit. That's the best they can hope for really.