|
Post by sportsman on May 15, 2020 6:21:15 GMT
NCP. 54%. 28% Mori. 52%. 30% Opinium. 49% 33% All wrong ????? Who knows with all the lies, , people are easy to control, brain wash and manipulate Tell that to all those on here attacking the goverment for every little move in this, who keep attaching their snippets from journalists they don't know of.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 6:30:58 GMT
If you mean Poles. Please show me one post where I’ve said that. In fact find me one post where I’ve said anything racist And when you can’t an apology would be nice Ahhh silence from little gary Poor little Gary Petal.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 6:35:13 GMT
The law is the law duck simple ! do you condone law breaking ? a crime is a crime the punishment in the case of illegal immigrants is deportation or do you propose another punishment and what would it be ? Actually I do in certain circumstances, certain types of duress being one. Broad minded people usually take context into account Broad minded or brainwashed
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 6:36:59 GMT
truth hurt grow a pair answer the question it's easy enough wtf you on about grow a pair ffs how old are you... You just waffle on on every thread talking shite fella.firing your bait out trying to catch something... Still no answer I wonder why
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 6:38:13 GMT
In huge surprise it begins, the govt try to rush schools back with inadequate protection and with deaths and community transmission still high. Teachers oppose via unions, and suddenly it's now the fault of either 'lazy teachers' or 'militant unions'. I bloody hope there is a strike at this rate, because without proper guidance and protection, teachers should not be expected to out their own, their family, and their closest at risk by rushing back schools so we can pretend things are going well. My gut feeling is that we'll see a huge spike before the 1st of June, and we'll be back in lockdown, when the government will blame the population for not following their 'if you can, if possible' wishy washy shite. More divide & conquer from the propaganda machine www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52669441You maybe right there lilf(with the June spike)cause that would lead into the summer schools recess nicely & relinquish the government of a lot of responsibility to children. Cynical B@$¥@&ds Since my missus is high risk, my lad won't be going back until September. He's doing all of his work at home on a daily basis, asking for more each day and is one of the few children in his class following complete guidelines about sending work into his teacher by email. So much so that he's had a thank you from the head mistress. To be totally frank, he's a very bright lad who doesn't get the one to one attention he's currently getting at home in a class of over 30 kids that is dominated by 3 or 4 kids with behavioral issues (With only one teacher and one support assistant for half a day - cut due to funding), and is often left to his own devices with minimal support (his words). He'll learn more from us at home anyway, get more attention and attention that he deserves to challenge him on a daily basis than he will at an overworked, understaffed Academy School.
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on May 15, 2020 6:54:39 GMT
Grim news from my brother's partner yesterday, who works in a mortuary. She's worked on more suicides than covid cases this week. But is that covid cases going down, or suicides levels going up or staying the same?
|
|
|
Post by Timmypotter on May 15, 2020 6:57:11 GMT
Grim news from my brother's partner yesterday, who works in a mortuary. She's worked on more suicides than covid cases this week. But is that covid cases going down, or suicides levels going up or staying the same? Bit of both I think. It's only circumstantial although she did say they'd had similar reports from a few other offices.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 15, 2020 7:05:18 GMT
I can see where you’re coming from and I agree with your last point. However surely entering a country illegally is a criminal act and therefore strictly speaking they are criminals Committing a crime and being accused of being a criminal by nature are not the same thing for me. It’s about context and generalisations like this are what has the world fucked up for me. Vague generalisations backed up by selective data or statistics appears the way politics and political discourse is heading and it’s concerning. Breaking the law is a crime, you break the law you commit a crime if caught you are a criminal is that so hard to understand ?
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on May 15, 2020 7:09:41 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk?
As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents.
There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs.
If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be?
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on May 15, 2020 7:11:51 GMT
Sir Kier's principles and Political direction are very clear and rooted deep within his Socialist soul! It irks me greatly that there is a Sir at the head of the labour party, much like it irked me that the once Stoke central MP was a Tory, I mean a deep rooted Labour man from Cambridge called Tristram. Unfortunately knighthoods are given out far too easily, many of which are politically motivated. Unless there is a substantial background to the individual such as charity/community work, or major benefits to wider society in the pursuit of public good or national improvement, they aren’t worth the paper they are written on. Achieving a knighthood for doing your paid job doesn’t tick the box in my opinion....there are far more deserving persons who go unnoticed.
|
|
|
Post by yeswilko on May 15, 2020 7:17:01 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? Young kids can't distance from each other, that's the problem. They just don't know enough about the potential spread from it. so it makes more sense to write of this school year, do more studies and hopefully have a workable plan in September. I won't be sending my 2 young kids in until then.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 7:17:42 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? The problem is, I'm a parent, and when they say "children are low risk" all I hear is the word "risk". We all know children are not in the vulnerable category, but we do know they arent immune to it either. I'm not sending my son back in just yet because I can't justify the risk in my head. In my opinion, that's a natural decision as a parent. It is your instinct to protect at all costs. And putting aside risk to our kids, let's assume they are, on the whole, unaffected. What about them picking up the virus at school and them bringing it back into their house and passing it onto parents and siblings? What about the teachers and other school staff who are vulnerable to pick it up from the kids they look after? Schools are incubators for germs. They can implement all the measures they like, but you cant social distance in a school and control the spread of germs or a virus. Whilst there are still hundreds dying every day, and thousands of new confirmed cases, it just seems way too soon to be opening up schools.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 7:19:59 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? What if a child passes on the virus through touch, clothing etc and brings it home to the family? Family that have vulnerable people in the household? It's an open question since, after god knows how many months, we still don't have any real concrete evidence to suggest how this virus spreads, how easy it spreads, how long it lives on different types of surfaces other than some waffle from a group of people who have been proven to be total liars from day one.
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on May 15, 2020 7:26:07 GMT
As do hear what you’re both saying and I really believe anyone should be able to opt out.
One of the very few areas I agree with the government is the cost to life if the economy takes a big hit. I know it’s a film but I’m sure Brad Pitt says something about as unemployment increases so does mortality. Schools also help deliver care to the most vulnerable in some cases.
If not schools as the first step, even if it’s deemed too early what should the first step be? Or would you prefer to wait for more information or a vaccine?
|
|
|
Post by werrington on May 15, 2020 7:26:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on May 15, 2020 7:28:33 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? What if a child passes on the virus through touch, clothing etc and brings it home to the family? Family that have vulnerable people in the household? It's an open question since, after god knows how many months, we still don't have any real concrete evidence to suggest how this virus spreads, how easy it spreads, how long it lives on different types of surfaces other than some waffle from a group of people who have been proven to be total liars from day one. Best to ask the scientists and professors on here...…
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 7:29:05 GMT
Our Government are all over this....
|
|
|
Post by Gob Bluth on May 15, 2020 7:29:49 GMT
Hopefully the answer lies behind the antibody test or a handful of countries opening up, fingers crossed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 7:30:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by werrington on May 15, 2020 7:35:56 GMT
Honestly mate I’m still struggling with doing anything other than basic stuff It’s bizarre how quickly I get out of breath and fluctuated heart rate 6 weeks now 😔
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 7:37:15 GMT
Honestly mate I’m still struggling with doing anything other than basic stuff It’s bizarre how quickly I get out of breath and fluctuated heart rate 6 weeks now 😔 Christ. Sounds a nasty one.
|
|
|
Post by yeswilko on May 15, 2020 7:39:38 GMT
Committing a crime and being accused of being a criminal by nature are not the same thing for me. It’s about context and generalisations like this are what has the world fucked up for me. Vague generalisations backed up by selective data or statistics appears the way politics and political discourse is heading and it’s concerning. Breaking the law is a crime, you break the law you commit a crime if caught you are a criminal is that so hard to understand ? Do you think Gove should be punished for his cocaine confessions?
|
|
|
Post by Timmypotter on May 15, 2020 7:44:24 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? I heard this interview on WatO the other day about the way we assess the risk associated with covid. Whatever else happens, at some point we will have to start making risk judgements on covid in the same way we make them about getting into a car or crossing the road. It's not going to go anywhere and we can't shut down for years on end. Starts at 37.45 www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000j2s0
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2020 8:10:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 15, 2020 8:11:58 GMT
This has been Don Trump's amateur quack 'hunch' right from the get-go, may be there is method to his apparent madness! In fairness if that 24 new infections per day in London stat is true that is an eye-watering, stunning piece of information! Can it really be true? Surely it can't...
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 15, 2020 8:15:55 GMT
Our school contacted us this week and asked us if we'd be sending our son in, in June, per the Government announcement. We told them no, and they were very supportive. From speaking to a number of other patents, I would estimate there will be a high percentage of parents not sending their kids back. Good because its totally unnecessary for the sake of a few weeks. I can't see any benefit at all in not waiting until the new school year starts in September. It'll give staff time to plan properly and will give us time to get the the infection rates down a little more. They don't have the modelling to say how much of a risk it is in spreading the virus across the community either It's a total no brainer apart from the parents who are sick of having their kids at home. Very unfair is that last comment. A 6 week stint at school would be very good for many children. My eldest is first year high school and is really bright. When he can be bothered to get his arse in gear he's capable of doing some good work at home with some help where needed. My youngest is 6 and whilst socially he's excellent, he really struggles with school work. It is near impossible to home school him effectively and even more impossible when you have to work yourself. My wife is worried sick that this time away will mean he will never catch up. He is year 2 and if schools reopen, he'll be going back for sure, however long it's for.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on May 15, 2020 8:16:35 GMT
I agree that the government have made a complete arse of 90% of this but is the first step not to open schools or at least try to in a reduced capacity due to the low risk? As an outsider it would be the first step due to the low risk to children and the subsequent knock on effect it could have to free up parts of the labour market. Primary schools first due to the importance of early years, relative young age of children and assumed youngish age of parents. There will be exceptions to the above but there should be opt outs. If this isn’t the first step I’m not sure what should be? Young kids can't distance from each other, that's the problem. They just don't know enough about the potential spread from it. so it makes more sense to write of this school year, do more studies and hopefully have a workable plan in September. I won't be sending my 2 young kids in until then. This a picture from a school in France, to me this is not natural, and actually could be quite psychologically damaging for young children whose natural instinct is to seek close contact with others. These kids will probably need psychological support in the future imho. They'll all be on drugs by the time they are 12 Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on May 15, 2020 8:18:22 GMT
If you read the Daily Mail you're a twat and that's that.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on May 15, 2020 8:19:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on May 15, 2020 8:24:20 GMT
If you read the Daily Mail you're a twat and that's that. That is just sick. People who write it are pathologically sick as are the people who read it. The only thing they promote is Divisiveness.
|
|