 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
As there has been only 332 deaths from corona virus of people under 45 is it time to start letting these people return to some sort of normality? Maybe ages 46-64 could also have restrictions lifted slightly and over 65s be told to shield for 12 weeks.
It may be harsh but over 65s have very little impact on the economy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As there has been only 332 deaths from corona virus of people under 45 is it time to start letting these people return to some sort of normality? Maybe ages 46-64 could also have restrictions lifted slightly and over 65s be told to shield for 12 weeks.
It may be harsh but over 65s have very little impact on the economy "
Lol I just cannot stop laughing at this lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Myself and a colleague (who's 67) are key workers so have been working all through the lockdown. Do you think we will get weeks of in lieu when all these fit youngsters are allowed out of their cacoons!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ornLordMan
over a year ago
Wiltshire and London |
I’m sure you’d be happier for under-40s to return to normality, OP?
My view is that the relaxation should apply to all but there should be much better observance - possibly legally enforceable - of social distancing. Many, especially those in the younger age groups, seem oblivious of what it means. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’m sure you’d be happier for under-40s to return to normality, OP?
My view is that the relaxation should apply to all but there should be much better observance - possibly legally enforceable - of social distancing. Many, especially those in the younger age groups, seem oblivious of what it means."
.
By personal experience it's the older generation who seem to have no awareness of social distancing, at the very least when it comes to food shopping. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As there has been only 332 deaths from corona virus of people under 45 is it time to start letting these people return to some sort of normality? Maybe ages 46-64 could also have restrictions lifted slightly and over 65s be told to shield for 12 weeks.
It may be harsh but over 65s have very little impact on the economy "
Is that so you can get your hole quicker   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Just because us younger people are not dieing from this at the same scale, we are still as infectious to the rest of the country. Relax for us and we can be the ones to cause the second wave.
Even surviving death, we may get lung, heart, brain and organ failures and permanent injury from covid-19. No one should be lambs for the slaughter.
We have a moral obligation to protect health and life above the economy. We are not one of the world's poorest countries, so we can afford health. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just because us younger people are not dieing from this at the same scale, we are still as infectious to the rest of the country. Relax for us and we can be the ones to cause the second wave.
Even surviving death, we may get lung, heart, brain and organ failures and permanent injury from covid-19. No one should be lambs for the slaughter.
We have a moral obligation to protect health and life above the economy. We are not one of the world's poorest countries, so we can afford health. "
I agree. Health means wealth.
The last 3 months would be wasted and any one any age can spread it.
Stay home.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That is still 332 To many "
You could easily take the monthly death rate from vehicles and say exactly the same it's too many so should we ban all use of vehicles? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"That is still 332 To many
You could easily take the monthly death rate from vehicles and say exactly the same it's too many so should we ban all use of vehicles? "
That's a false dichotomy. The 2 are not the same. And apart from your troll argument, about 145 people of all ages are killed on the roads each month so Covid is already killing 220% as many people under 45 as it does people of all ages and that's with the restrictions in place. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The problem with with this idea is while there may be fewer deaths with younger People those who had this illness and recovered some have been left with permanent lung damage. Some have even suffered organ failure because of lack of oxygen while infected that they also got permanent damage to there heart, kidneys or liver. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That is still 332 To many
You could easily take the monthly death rate from vehicles and say exactly the same it's too many so should we ban all use of vehicles?
That's a false dichotomy. The 2 are not the same. And apart from your troll argument, about 145 people of all ages are killed on the roads each month so Covid is already killing 220% as many people under 45 as it does people of all ages and that's with the restrictions in place."
Is everything you disagree with a "troll argument"?
anyway it was just a question and you managed to answer, in a fashion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"That is still 332 To many
You could easily take the monthly death rate from vehicles and say exactly the same it's too many so should we ban all use of vehicles?
That's a false dichotomy. The 2 are not the same. And apart from your troll argument, about 145 people of all ages are killed on the roads each month so Covid is already killing 220% as many people under 45 as it does people of all ages and that's with the restrictions in place.
Is everything you disagree with a "troll argument"?
anyway it was just a question and you managed to answer, in a fashion "
Not everything I disagree with is but trying to create a false equivalence between different situations is trolling 101.
Instead of discussing the actual issue you say A and B are the same (even if they're not) and then start arguing the case of B. Road accidents have nothing to do with this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
