IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Banker]

31 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

When you ask an intelligent question I may respond then again I may not the chances of you posting anything remotely intelligent would point to probably not.   When are you and Wanker, sorry Banker, announcing your engagement ? It would be nice to get some joyful news for a change in these challenging times.   

Possibly when you and your alter ego or is it boyfriend PK stop posting crap.

A respected medic in Wrighty has given his view we should just crack on but you and your other half just keep on with your blinkered shut the borders approach 

[P.K.]

3 hours ago, HeliX said:

What part of asking the vulnerable to isolate while the rest get on with it isn't performing the duty of care?

They are vulnerable people so as long as provision is made that's effective so they don't fall foul of isolation and depression and so forth it might work out ok.

Then again it might not.

4 hours ago, HeliX said:

And what actual practical implementation are you suggesting that would?

What on earth makes you think I'm a psychologist?

What is your ground-breaking strategy...?

[John Wright]

15 hours ago, P.K. said:

Folks just shouldn't take themselves, and therefore this message board, too seriously. So there's never any real "frothing at the mouth" at all. Except for the UK politicians whose incompetence has killed literally tens of thousands of innocents. Which Bozo calls "our success". A truly dispical excuse for a human being.

I used to have some right ding dongs with the Woolster but unlike most of the spats on here there was never any malice or spite in them. Mutual respect made sure of that. Which meant we both enjoyed them very much indeed. Too much 'ad hominem' just drags everything into the mire. And there's a lot of nastiness involved.

Not good.

Irony alert

[P.K.]

6 hours ago, John Wright said:

Irony alert

I seem to recall the Woolsters' farewell speech said much the same.

ETA - about the lack of malice that is. Not irony.

Messed that up!

Edited October 8, 2020 by P.K.

[HeliX]

14 hours ago, P.K. said:

If it comes back then I would hope everyone will pull together to protect our society.

I'm asking you to elaborate on this. Perhaps I wrongly assumed you knew what you meant when you typed it.

[P.K.]

1 minute ago, HeliX said:

I'm asking you to elaborate on this. Perhaps I wrongly assumed you knew what you meant when you typed it.

I think you mean you would like me to elaborate on this.

Why?

[HeliX]

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I think you mean you would like me to elaborate on this.

Why?

Why would I ask you to elaborate on a point you made on a discussion forum? Fuck only knows I guess.

[P.K.]

7 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Why would I ask you to elaborate on a point you made on a discussion forum? Fuck only knows I guess.

It's just I've already answered it:

https://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65760-iom-covid-removing-restrictions/&do=findComment&comment=1458155

Get a grip....

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

It's just I've already answered it:

https://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/65760-iom-covid-removing-restrictions/&do=findComment&comment=1458155

Get a grip....

That's not an answer.

"If it comes back then I would hope everyone will pull together to protect our society."

"Then go ahead and elaborate on what you meant by "If it comes back then I would hope everyone will pull together to protect our society." in terms of practical steps."

"The government of the day have a duty of care to ALL of their citizens.

So do what they say."

 

Despite your constant need to make snide remarks, move the goalposts and deflect questions, I am still interested to know why you think isolating the vulnerable and making provisions for them to not run short of supplies while letting the rest of the country get on with it is somehow failing the Government's duty of care. And what, exactly, you would prefer to see which wouldn't fail that duty of care.

More fool me I suppose.

[P.K.]

Doing what the government asks of you is an answer.

Would you please answer this. Thanks.

9 hours ago, P.K. said:

What is your ground-breaking strategy...?

 

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, P.K. said:

Doing what the government asks of you is an answer.

Would you please answer this. Thanks.

 

Your elaboration of everyone pulling together to protect society is "Doing what the Government asks of you"?

Oh dear.

[P.K.]

16 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Your elaboration of everyone pulling together to protect society is "Doing what the Government asks of you"?

Oh dear.

Still waiting for your ground-breaking strategy.

Thank you.

[HeliX]

12 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Still waiting for your ground-breaking strategy.

Thank you.

I don't think I've ever claimed to have one.

Were it me in charge, and I'm glad it's not, when the virus returns here I'd recommend the vulnerable isolate, put provision in place to have food etc brought to them (perhaps by some of the ridiculous number of Govt staff), recommend masks, recommend businesses put in distancing as best they can but otherwise crack on.

EDIT: For the avoidance of doubt I should mention I also mean continue track & trace and isolation of affected individuals.

Out of interest, do you always think people should do exactly as the Government says because it's in the interests of protecting society, or only when the Government says something you happen to agree with?

Edited October 8, 2020 by HeliX

[Roger Mexico]

42 minutes ago, HeliX said:

[...] I am still interested to know why you think isolating the vulnerable and making provisions for them to not run short of supplies while letting the rest of the country get on with it is somehow failing the Government's duty of care.

The real problem about protecting the vulnerable and letting everyone 'get on with it' is that it isn't practically possible.  Wrighty pointed this out (in a comment no one seems to have read properly) earlier:

14 hours ago, wrighty said:

The problem with locking down the vulnerable is what would you do with the non-vulnerable who look after them? I’m talking care assistants, nurses, therapists etc. Are they to be locked down too? And their families? The logical conclusion is that it has to be all or nothing. 

 

[HeliX]

Just now, Roger Mexico said:

The real problem about protecting the vulnerable and letting everyone 'get on with it' is that it isn't practically possible.  Wrighty pointed this out (in a comment no one seems to have read properly) earlier:

I did respond to that part - I think there's a bit of a leap between "carers need to isolate" and "the conclusion is it has to be all or nothing". I know the number of carers in the UK is pretty significant, but so is the number of non-carers...