Elephant Pyjamas
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2011
- Messages
- 14,312
- Reaction score
- 10,005
Which confirms there will be restrictions AFTER Christmas i'm sure.
Except there doesn't appear such a thing as herd immunity because the virus keeps mutating in a way that bypasses previous immunity. Some people have had it 3 times and while it may currently be that the 2nd and 3rd times have been milder it does not mean that will always be the case as the virus continues to evolve, does it? Maybe it does, I don't know, I'm certainly not an epidemiologist!
Not really, taxation is used to influence behaviour in this instance, as it is used in Cities to reduce emissions from cars.So because we "charge" people to do it, it's ok that it means they are more likely to die? That's some very odd thinking.
Oh and my comparison is accurate, as the "pill" that cures the ills of smoking is to just stop doing it, or do not start it in the first place, the same applies to many people who are obese, just stop eating so much.
It may well have, it also would have added around £200bn to the national debt - see how many times you can pull that off and still spend on the NHS, it's a false economy mateThat's interesting, it certainly looks like more people died than should have. Lockdown may well have helped prevent some of those deaths.
Well i agree with all of that other than the last sentence.Not really, taxation is used to influence behaviour in this instance, as it is used in Cities to reduce emissions from cars.
Obviously we will have to disagree with the comparison, although I understand your point on an individual level, its worth understanding that we have a large population of smokers and obese people within society. If it was as simple as not eating unhealthy food or just 'not smoking' then it wouldn't be a social problem. whatever next tell those suffering from mental health to pull themselves together and go for a brisk walk?
Not really a red herring as obesity triples the risk of being admitted to hospital with covid.The smoking, drinking and obesity argument is a red herring because the damage caused by those doesn't all collapse onto the NHS at a similar time. Equally irrelevant is the NHS has struggled for years, well of course it has it's criminally underfunded, but again you aren't putting it under additional strain with a mass influx of simply avoidable cases
There would be more NHS capacity if there were less smokers and less obesity, that's a fact.The smoking, drinking and obesity argument is a red herring because the damage caused by those doesn't all collapse onto the NHS at a similar time.
I can't imagine that smoking 40 a day helps with Covid either.Not really a red herring as obesity triples the risk of being admitted to hospital with covid.
Boris Johnson has CONFIRMED NO further restrictions before Christmas
sunak announcing financial support measures being extended/reopened confirms that measures are coming.Which confirms there will be restrictions AFTER Christmas i'm sure.
It may well have, it also would have added around £200bn to the national debt - see how many times you can pull that off and still spend on the NHS, it's a false economy mate
It would have been insanity to lock down then the same as it would be now, there was a vaccine then (flu) like there is now - if people didn't take it it's on them the same as it is now.
Not really a red herring as obesity triples the risk of being admitted to hospital with covid.
Yep, i think i agree with that, i'm all for fairness.We tax smokers, drinkers and fatties. We should tax unvaccinated too.
Ok, I think I'll leave it there for the afternoon, thats enough internet for me.Well i agree with all of that other than the last sentence.
But who is to say that those who refuse to take the Vaccine aren't suffering from some sort of mental health issue?
Why the sympathy for smokers or those that can choose to eat less, but don't. But 0 sympathy for those who might just simply be absolutely terrified of needles?
We tax smokers, drinkers and fatties. We should tax unvaccinated too.
Unfortunately debt kills too, look at the effects of austerity! 100s of thousands died due to that, and we are still seeing the effects of it now, it could be argued that the NHS capacity would be larger and that we wouldn't need lockdowns now if it hadn't been so brutal.If it's a choice between life or debt then I choose life. Every single time.
That will never happen, apart from the humanitarian angle, no govt would risk the fallout and pretty much all health workers would refuse to do itYep, i think i agree with that, i'm all for fairness.
It's the idea that we shouldn't treat them if they get ill that repulses me!
That's an option but how would thst be facilitated. Obviously they are taxed when the person buys those products, what would unvaccinated buy that vaccinated wouldn't?
Feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall.If it's a choice between life or debt then I choose life. Every single time.
That's actually a really good idea in principle you know - all the money it raised could go to building capacity in the NHS - most people would just get the vaccine to avoid paying more but the people who felt really strongly wouldn't have their liberty taken away.We tax smokers, drinkers and fatties. We should tax unvaccinated too.