Boris refused to rule out lockdown

[Puppylucky]

Boris Johnson refused to deny that he would consider lockdown again if the Covid Pandemic took an unexpected turn and now the papers are full of lockdown headlines again. Will we ever move beyond this?

Right now there are people who go out to work and people who don’t. People who are busy and people who aren’t. Not sure why you would make that a lockdown specific thing unless you were implying that most people who weren’t going to an office, were at home baking banana bread.

A lot of people on furlough were baking banana bread or similar, sitting in the sun and banging on about Rishi for PM

A lot of people on furlough were baking banana bread or similar, sitting in the sun and banging on about Rishi for PM

Quite. Paying people to sit at home was a huge part of the strategy and I'm not sure why anyone's trying to deny that now.

@BoredZelda

for goodness sake, I said “other people” not everyone.

In which case, there is no difference between lockdown and not lockdown in that respect.

Right now there are people who go out to work and people who don’t. People who are busy and people who aren’t. Not sure why you would make that a lockdown specific thing unless you were implying that most people who weren’t going to an office, were at home baking banana bread.

I made it a lockdown specific thing because it was - but again, only for some people. There were plenty of threads on here with people saying “do you know what, it’s actually really nice having all this enforced downtime”. The weather was glorious, some people (many of whom were probably super busy normally) were on furlough with no kids and it was a bit of a holiday for them. I don’t judge them for that, I’m glad some people managed to recharge or get fit or learn a new skill - why shouldn’t they have done that if they were able to, it’s not the misery olympics. I really wasn’t implying anything at all, I said exactly what I meant and I maintain that it’s true - that some people went out to work every day to keep the country running, and some people baked banana bread (or whatever other hobby they took up). I just missed out all the other categories of people inbetween. I can’t see that specific scenario happening again.

I think we could do better with our terminology than talking about paying people to stay at home and bake banana bread. It pisses people off, and leaves out another significant plank of the stay at home strategy, which involved millions of people who used to work out of the home being made to do their jobs remotely instead. Often alongside childcare.

But it's absolutely true that ensuring enough people were paid to stay at home was a key part of the lockdown strategy. Some of that was furlough and some of that was forbidding their employers to require them to work outside the home. Lockdowns simply would not have worked as they did if both of these things weren't in place.

And because there are a lot of jobs that weren't and aren't likely to be considered 'essential' but also can't be done remotely, any future lockdown would have to involve paying those workers enough to allow them to stay at home out of the way and to pacify them. There's no getting round that.

Dunno about headlines, not been out or seen a printed newspaper today, but it's been reported. I saw it trending on twitter yesterday too.

Google searching a story isn’t the same as it being all over the news. It is nowhere on the Independent’s front webpage, it’s way down the bottom of Bloomberg, and isn’t showing anywhere in Twitter trending.

For OP to suggest “full of lockdown headlines again” is very disingenuous and serves only to raise the profile of a very minor report.

that some people went out to work every day to keep the country running, and some people baked banana bread (or whatever other hobby they took up)

Which was no different in 2019 and is no different now.

[quote Puppylucky]@leafygreens he mentioned lockdown specifically later in the interview saying he had no regrets about mandating action that saved thousands of lives and would do it again-so not just masks.[/quote]
Which is eminently sensible.

I can't see what the problem is. If shit hits the fan again then all necessary steps will be taken.

As you would expect.

Which was no different in 2019 and is no different now.

The difference is that significant numbers of people who would not normally be facilitated to sit at home and bake banana bread were. And wouldn't be facilitated to do this under any other circumstances.

If shit hits the fan again then all necessary steps will be taken.

Just don't expect them to have the same affect as they did in March 2020, if the shit actually did hit the fan at this stage.

However of course Boris can't say this and his response was perfectly sensible in the circumstances.

@HardyBuckette you’re right, my phrasing is probably a bit inflammatory (unintentionally so, but I accept I was being flippant) it is better to say that people were paid to stay at home. Some of those people who were paid to stay at home - and necessarily so - did not have a lot to do and enjoyed themselves to a certain extent. I struggle to see this happening again in the same way it did before.

And now I’m gonna get off this thread and walk the dogs hope everyone has a good weekend.

@Lottapianos

He must have had some rush of blood to the head or similar because he's been saying sensible things all week. Of course he can't rule out another lockdown. I'm certainly not panicking about it but we have no idea what the future holds with this pandemic or any other

Agree. We could get another more deadly variant. Nobody can say we would never have to lock down again, because a situation might arise where that would be the best course of action.

I don't mean to be inflammatory either. I thought the furlough bashing at the time was awful. No one chose to be furloughed and good luck to anyone who got something positive out of it.

@BoredZelda

Dunno about headlines, not been out or seen a printed newspaper today, but it's been reported. I saw it trending on twitter yesterday too.

Google searching a story isn’t the same as it being all over the news. It is nowhere on the Independent’s front webpage, it’s way down the bottom of Bloomberg, and isn’t showing anywhere in Twitter trending.

For OP to suggest “full of lockdown headlines again” is very disingenuous and serves only to raise the profile of a very minor report.

I wouldn't know anything about the front pages, as I said. Also didn't see a newspaper yesterday which is when the story seems to have broken, and am not interested enough to pursue a discussion about headlines.

Either way, my view is that while the comments seem to have been quite widely reported on, it's not at all significant. It was a politician's answer to a question he can't possibly reply to with any truth, about a scenario that isn't very likely to happen.

Agree.
We could get another more deadly variant. Nobody can say we would never have to lock down again, because a situation might arise where that would be the best course of action.

Have you considered whether everything that's needed to have a successful lockdown would still be in place in this scenario? For example, would the people we rely on to keep society functioning by their work outside the home still all be willing to do it if their own risk and that of their loved ones was significantly increased? What would happen if they didn't? Or if it were just a bit more deadly but not that deadly, how would Johnson get it past a parliamentary party who don't want any more restrictions and cobble together enough public trust and compliance after Partygate to make it actually workable?

Just don't expect them to have the same affect as they did in March 2020, if the shit actually did hit the fan at this stage.

I'd expect different steps, numerous lessons having been learned.

I'd also expect a sizeable minority of people to continue blathering on about lockdowns, masks, anything and everything being useless and exhorting others not to bother because their reading of complex science is better than anyone with experience, because "we aren't all sheep, we should be asking questions" presumably again based on that superior knowledge base, because 'They' can't take our freedoms away, and, last but not least, we don't fucking want to.

Nothing would surprise me.

I'd also expect a sizeable minority of people to continue blathering on about lockdowns, masks, anything and everything being useless

It's the essential workers not playing ball in the context of a more deadly variant that people should be more worried about.

Of course he can't rule it out

But that doesn't mean it's likely.

If we had a new and serious wave then I would hope that the government does what is necessary in light of the circumstances.

No one has a crystal ball.

Of course he can't rule anything out about covid restrictions, or another virus pandemic, etc.

It was be stupid to say that it would never ever happen and it is something he, or his government, will never implement. They have no idea of what could occur in the future.

Would people comply?

It would very much depend on what was actually happening?
A particularly nasty variant that was killing healthy young people in their thousands - then yes, I think many people would especially based on the YouGov type findings I've read in recent weeks/months.
For covid how it is now, increasing numbers wouldn't comply.

Quite. Paying people to sit at home was a huge part of the strategy and I'm not sure why anyone's trying to deny that now.

Compensating people who were unable to work from home was the strategy. As it should be. But suggesting everyone who was furloughed just sat at home is incorrect.

Well he is right he can't 100% say we will never have another one as no one knows
Another virus could appear or we get a different variant so no he can't rule it out and is actually something sensible from him

And … I wouldn’t rule out president putin launching a nuclear weapon but I’m not about to build a bomb shelter in my cellar . The buffoon hasn’t got a clue what he’s taking about anyway . We are on our own with covid unless a variant that kills the healthy and young but realistically no , there will be no lockdowns .

It's the essential workers not playing ball in the context of a more deadly variant that people should be more worried about round here it was local care workers. A vocal group of them didn't believe they would be let go if they remained unvaccinated. Nothing their employer said about their hands being tied made a difference. They remained unvaccinated and refused to wear masks. Their clients, in their own homes or in group care, were all vulnerable adults, frightened and confused.

Their employer has replaced them all quite quickly. For some reason, presumably pay and work conditions, not having to have a car etc, they have never had issues recruiting.

Long way of saying "I know what you mean"

Just when I was starting to relax, there comes another little reminder that they can fuck with my life again whenever they feel like it. Great.

@TheKeatingFive

I'd also expect a sizeable minority of people to continue blathering on about lockdowns, masks, anything and everything being useless

It's the essential workers not playing ball in the context of a more deadly variant that people should be more worried about.

That, and social disorder depending on how bad it was. Essential workers also includes those who keep the services that pacify the population functioning.

I don’t think he (Boris) should have scrapped PCR testing. I don’t think lateral flow tests are picking up the new variants. Personally I know more people sick with Covid now than in lockdown.

Surely we can’t have gone through the past 2 years to let it run rife again. Being triple jabbed hasn’t stopped me from being really ill.