Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Say in 4 weeks time, everything steadily gets back to 'normal' with some obvious restrictions in place, but people refuse to come out of isolation.

For example, i'll obviously be happy to be able to go out again when I want, or go to the shops when i want, but do i want to commute for 4 hours a day through central london on packed trains? Probably not. In 4 weeks theres still going to be loads of people infected and spreading the virus.

I can see lots of people refusing to put their health, and their families health at risk for the sake of the economy.

So when lockdown is lifted, will you be going back to normal straight away?

My personal take if it's not deemed safe to have football matches, gyms, cinemas etc it's not safe to be sent back to work. Not taking a chance for someone else's benefit / profit if leisure remains banned

Look at the 1918 flu for a parallel, business owners forced the lockdown to be lifted early as it was hitting their profits... big second wave of cases. History may yet repeat itself...

https://amp.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... 12591.html

Sending the kids back into school is going to be a massive decision.

I'm sure the invisible hand of the market will come to a solution. (it might kill thousands, but it'll be "the market" that did it)

Personally, I think there absolutely does have to be a lockdown at some point. You cant force people to stay home forever, otherwise whats the point of living tbh? But like you say, are businesses gonna be able to sack people if they feel they cannot safely come and be at work? Will be interesting.

Yep, anyone still in employment will be looking nervously at that growing list of unemployed.

And as RedO says, it's the reopening of schools that will need to be the first big step towards people being able to return to work.

Tell you what...I'll not be coming out of lockdown anytime soon, whatever the government says.
As has been referenced earlier, the last major pandemic was in 1918. Because of the pressure put on by business people who were losing money, the government eased it, and as a result a second wave occurred, which killed millions more that the first wave.
At my age, there's no way, im going out and mixing with potential infected people

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:02 pm Personally, I think there absolutely does have to be a lockdown at some point. You cant force people to stay home forever, otherwise whats the point of living tbh? But like you say, are businesses gonna be able to sack people if they feel they cannot safely come and be at work? Will be interesting.

Indeed, having proven most office-based jobs can be done perfectly fine from home using remote working tools the argument to return to "presenteeism" is going to be a thin one in the current climate.

think we will all be watching to see what every one else
is doing.

Dunners wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:02 pm Yep, anyone still in employment will be looking nervously at that growing list of unemployed.

And as RedO says, it's the reopening of schools that will need to be the first big step towards people being able to return to work.

My point was that I'm not sure I'll trust the Government to tell us when we should be sending our children back to school. It's pretty clear that they should have shut down a week or two before they actually did. They kept them open (we can argue over the reasons why, be it incompetence or prioritising the economy) for longer than they should have.

Why should we trust them to get the timing right when it comes to re-opening them? I'm certain lots of people will be of the same mind.

Theres been research published that says closing schools has a minimal impact anyway.

I'm not sure that easing restrictions was what killed so many in the second wave of Spanish flu. The problem was that it had mutated into a more virulent form. Normally, the deadly forms die out because it causes the victim to take to their beds so they have less opportunity to spread the disease. People with the milder form continue with their daily lives, spreading the less deadly version which then dominates, so the harmful one dies out.

It's believed this normal cycle was turned om it's head because of the number of very sick in the trenches being removed to field hospitals, infecting many others on the way.

By the way, the first wave was similar to normal flu (or the current version) as it mainly killed the old and sick. The deadlier second wave primarily killed the young and healthy.

One of the reasons PW might want to continue the lockdown is so that large numbers of the seriously ill don't overpower the NHS and spread the deadly form more widely, causing a second wave that could attack his young and healthy self.

RedO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:59 pm

Dunners wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:02 pm Yep, anyone still in employment will be looking nervously at that growing list of unemployed.

And as RedO says, it's the reopening of schools that will need to be the first big step towards people being able to return to work.

My point was that I'm not sure I'll trust the Government to tell us when we should be sending our children back to school. It's pretty clear that they should have shut down a week or two before they actually did. They kept them open (we can argue over the reasons why, be it incompetence or prioritising the economy) for longer than they should have.

Why should we trust them to get the timing right when it comes to re-opening them? I'm certain lots of people will be of the same mind.

Why do you think the schools should have closed earlier than before it’s been stated by almost everybody that it has a marginal effect at best?.

Seems relevant

There is definitely resistance, many people I know are scared.

Commuting to central London seems stupid at the moment.

R rate rising.

I'm retired so don't have to go to work again , saying that when this shits over I won't be hurrying back to do thing I take for granted like going to the pub or football

StillSpike wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:58 pm I'm sure the invisible hand of the market will come to a solution. (it might kill thousands, but it'll be "the market" that did it)

You say that Comrade but as each day passes the invisible hand is revealed.

Working class lives are worth nothing.

I see the Morrisons have dropped their prices on most goods this week. Did someone have a word?

JimbO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:46 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:59 pm

Dunners wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:02 pm Yep, anyone still in employment will be looking nervously at that growing list of unemployed.

And as RedO says, it's the reopening of schools that will need to be the first big step towards people being able to return to work.

My point was that I'm not sure I'll trust the Government to tell us when we should be sending our children back to school. It's pretty clear that they should have shut down a week or two before they actually did. They kept them open (we can argue over the reasons why, be it incompetence or prioritising the economy) for longer than they should have.

Why should we trust them to get the timing right when it comes to re-opening them? I'm certain lots of people will be of the same mind.

Why do you think the schools should have closed earlier than before it’s been stated by almost everybody that it has a marginal effect at best?.

It has a marginal effect Really?

RedO wrote: ↑Fri May 15, 2020 11:56 pm

JimbO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:46 pm

RedO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:59 pm

My point was that I'm not sure I'll trust the Government to tell us when we should be sending our children back to school. It's pretty clear that they should have shut down a week or two before they actually did. They kept them open (we can argue over the reasons why, be it incompetence or prioritising the economy) for longer than they should have.

Why should we trust them to get the timing right when it comes to re-opening them? I'm certain lots of people will be of the same mind.

Why do you think the schools should have closed earlier than before it’s been stated by almost everybody that it has a marginal effect at best?.

It has a marginal effect Really?

Just tell him what the effect is. FFS

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 12:04 am

RedO wrote: ↑Fri May 15, 2020 11:56 pm

JimbO wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:46 pm

Why do you think the schools should have closed earlier than before it’s been stated by almost everybody that it has a marginal effect at best?.

It has a marginal effect Really?

Just tell him what the effect is. FFS

He doesn't know, he's just hoping that it's the case to support his own political agenda.

Even the Guardian suggests only a marginal impact to school closure: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... irus-study

My kids schools can’t stop nits and you can actually see those fuckers.

Also, what is my own political agenda Gilso?

RedO wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 12:19 am My kids schools can’t stop nits and you can actually see those fuckers.

No what you mean chief. My cats get them too.

Sometimes you can chase them through the fur and snap them in your fingers.

Max B Gold wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 12:38 am

RedO wrote: ↑Sat May 16, 2020 12:19 am My kids schools can’t stop nits and you can actually see those fuckers.

No what you mean chief. My cats get them too.

Sometimes you can chase them through the fur and snap them in your fingers.

I've heard the Scots like them deep fried. Is that true?