Jump to content

Foster14

Members
  • Content Count

    8,729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Foster14 last won the day on April 10 2019

Foster14 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

732 Excellent

About Foster14

  • Rank
    1st Team Manager
  • Birthday 10/14/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

8,622 profile views
  1. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    There is the possibility that there is a school of thought that reduced hours might reduce the risk. To me though, even if there is evidence that the above is the case, have the following been considered: People change their habits, so that the level of drunkeness they previously achieved 10pm onwards is now 7pm onwards? That as these establishments close early with people starting to get towards that level of drunkeness, they end up going to house parties, or mates for drinks or suchlike? As I said in my last post, I can understand why some of the decisions are being made, I just don't like that they are being dressed up as being led by science primarily when I don't believe they are. I believe they are being led by economic pressures. And that is a shitter when we are far more likely to have household visits with most people we see rather than restaurant/bar visits.
  2. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    a) I've not been in many pubs/restaurants of late, but the few times I've been in I can see immediately that guidance is not being followed. Either multiple households at one table or people moving about to speak to other tables etc. This may change with stricter penalties and more inspections going forward, but it still depends in trust of the information you get from customers. Instead of trusting a household of people you would invite over, you are trusting the actions of the people running the establishment you are in, plus everyone that happens to be in it. b) Arguments that these controlled environments are better ventilated etc than home seems to be put forward as universal argument when that is clearly not the case. I've been in plenty establishments where ventilation is at a premium. c) My garden is not a controlled environment. I am trusted to have people in my garden as long as I want. The risk is lower outdoors, but is a non-socially distanced catch up outdoors safer than a socially distanced catch up indoors? d) The only outbreak of note that we have had locally (up here) has been in the "controlled" environment. There has been no issue with household to household within the local area. Yet, we are being told that we can still do the thing that caused the outbreak locally is allowed to continue, but something else that hasn't been an issue isn't allowed. e) If it is that controlled an environment, what makes it become uncontrolled after 10pm? f) Why were we allowed to meet indoors before we could go to a restaurant/bar indoors during the gradual easing of the original lockdown? g) To parliament yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon basically said that she would shut pubs and hospitality if she had the ability to continue schemes like the Job Retention Scheme. The main reason they are remaining open is to protect jobs. To me, it seems like they are risks with all interactions, and the main reason that we are allowed to meet people in an indoor environment with lots of other people rather than an indoor environment where there are just two households is because of the economy. I understand this reasoning from a national policy perspective, but trying to dress it up as scientifically backed is just nonsense. Then when you add in that we are now moving from a regional approach to a more national approach just leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Why in areas of low prevalence are we having as strict rules with areas with high prevalence? Why was this not the case in the Aberdeen lockdown? Why is there no 5 mile travel limit in the areas where stronger measures were required before? I'm losing confidence in the Scottish government making good decisions around this. The less confidence I have, the less likely I am to abide by rules they set.
  3. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    NHS Grampian - 7 positives NHS Greater Glagow & Clyde - 181 positives Does NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde cover 25 times the population of that covered by NHS Grampian? Nope, it is just over double.
  4. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    So people who can self police, have to be policed to follow the rules, because those that can't follow the rules can't police themselves? And what are the rules? If we meet in a restaurant, do the two households have to be on two separate tables at least a metre apart? As no place I've been to has been doing that for separate households. There is just no logic in the approach.
  5. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Where is the logic in allowing two households to meet in a pub, restaurant, cafe etc but not in the home?! I do not understand.
  6. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Load of shit. Why is that not reviewed locally instead of Scotland wide?
  7. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Cheers. So 2 households still fine and no travel restrictions?
  8. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Is @The Buzzard going to give us our usual scoop on the changes coming?!
  9. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Haha, noticed this but couldn't be bothered being a pedant at the time. 0.6% or 0.006, but not combined. It would suggest 1 in 10 get long covid or whatever it is called.
  10. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Exactly my issue with this. You punish the rule abiders even more to offset the folk who don't follow the rules anyway. If someone breaks rules now, stricter rules aren't going to stop them.
  11. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Cause every cunt will be breaking the law anyway.
  12. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Why is it when we opened up, household mixing came back before hospitality, but when we are closing down, household mixing seems to be deemed the bigger threat?
  13. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    First thing the BBC says after is that it is showing the seriousness of it by it being the first time they've spoken like this without politicians present. Eh?! They are political advisors, doing a press conference from Downing Street. All politically managed.
  14. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    Waiting with bated breath to see what restrictions are coming in this week. Meant to be away this weekend and still plan to go even if "leisure" travel restrictions come in to play, but imagine if they do come in to play, a lot of hotels will be as well closing up for the foreseeable.
  15. Foster14

    Coronavirus

    I guess they are being guided by something or maybe looking for a half way house that saves closing restaurants/bars again and the ballache that goes with that - job losses, businesses closing etc. If there is evidence that suggests that it worsens as the night goes on though, I don't think the answer is closing earlier as there will be behavioural changes that go with that surely? So long since I had a proper night out, but to me, the start time is in part affected by the planned end time! Also, as for the pro-rata bit, does it not potentially see more full restaurants/pubs. Not sure how many are running at 100% capacity now, but more will be closer to it surely. And we are only a few weeks removed from the successful subsidised plan to get more people in these establishments!
×
×
  • Create New...