Quote from: squatz1 on Today at 05:40:36 PM

Quote from: Gyfts on Today at 05:27:21 PM

Quote from: Cnut237 on Today at 10:02:37 AM

Quote from: sort_cirkit on December 23, 2020, 07:19:51 PM

Quote from: franky1 on December 20, 2020, 03:23:45 PM

anyway all the news about the london strain is showing that more people are getting infected due to londoners disobeying the rules.

The virus is unlikely to spread after the lockdown. The people of England are educated and humane.

Anecdotally, I've seen plenty of people here in the UK flouting rules, not wearing masks in shops and public transport, not social distancing, travelling to other areas. People in the UK are no better or worse than people elsewhere, they've just people. Some obey the rules, some don't. Some actively try to not spread the virus, others couldn't care less.

Given what we've seen here so far, I would expect the 'tier 4' lockdown to be only partially effective. There are also people who are angry that other countries won't let people from the UK in... but if we had a more responsible attitude, the UK should be pre-emptively closing its borders to stop this variant from getting out.

WOW!

I was told it was just the fat Americans that couldn't abide by lockdown regulations for 2 weeks effectively extending this pandemic and then killing over 200k people. A bit crazy how that works!

Lockdowns do absolutely nothing when the spread is out of control and I'm rather shocked the UK is focused on lockdown despite a strain that is more transmissible is floating around. Locking down will not stop the spread at this point -- focus on protecting the elderly instead of trying to destroy people's livelihood.

I mean... If the spread is out of control enough, a temporary lockdown is not a bad idea. It allows for local officials to look at what is going on and more effectively plan for what they're doing for the future in terms of what businesses can stay open, regulations regarding the amount of people, if they're going to have county / state officials check in on things at establishments and so on and so forth.

Obviously you don't want to keep this lockdown going for that long, but as long as needed to ensure the spread is at least under control.

Unless you literally chain people to their bed post, lockdowns won't do much except delay the inevitable. When you have people going to grocery stores or going out in public, it defeats the purpose of the lockdown.

So, what you end up getting is a destroyed local economy, kids missing out on their vaccines, women missing breast cancer screenings, increased domestic abuse, depression, ect. in order to *attempt* to slow down the spread when in reality it does nearly nothing.

My view from the start has always been protect the most vulnerable because it's a strategy that's feasible oppose to trying to chain a 22 year old and stop them from going out. Kids these days hardly ever listen, and the hard right boomer population act the same way.