Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[WhiteRoseKillie]

59 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

There's no doubt many of the super rich have been massive dicks during this, and deciding to f**k off to wherever they can to avoid it.

And yes, there's an element of 'making your own rules' that applies to lots of people.

But denying that there's problem with a load of arseholes who are the drugs of society is just weird. It's like doing argumentative gymnastics to hide the issue.

My local asda is a good indicator, as it's in a shitty area, and the 'i don't give a f**k brigade' can be seen fairly regularly.

Interesting that of the supermarkets that said they would enforce mask wearing, asda was the biggest one that refused.

It's always nice to have someone to look down on, though, isn't it?

To elect successive Governments who treat the socially and economically disadvantaged like animals is one thing. To then act surprised when they react like animals* is , frankly, reprehensible.

Unless we have some Landed Gentry among us (which I doubt), every single poster on here has more in common with the jakey begging next to the ATM than they will ever have to the cúnts running the country.

* By which I mean, for the vast, vast majority of your bogeyman "underclass", simply trying to survive in a society that has not only abandoned them, but blames them for the slightest inconvenience in the lives of those lucky enough not to be in their position.

[Billy Jean King]

There's no doubt many of the super rich have been massive dicks during this, and deciding to f**k off to wherever they can to avoid it.

And yes, there's an element of 'making your own rules' that applies to lots of people.

But denying that there's problem with a load of arseholes who are the drugs of society is just weird. It's like doing argumentative gymnastics to hide the issue.

My local asda is a good indicator, as it's in a shitty area, and the 'i don't give a f**k brigade' can be seen fairly regularly.

Interesting that of the supermarkets that said they would enforce mask wearing, asda was the biggest one that refused.

We are a 1 supermarket town, it's a Morrisons.
Last week the security guard started to enforce the single shopper and mask guidance and the utter bile towards the poor guy on SM is beyond belief. It seems to stem mostly from women being questioned whether it was necessary for their teenage kid(s) to be shopping with them (they were not challenging shoppers with younger kids). The standard post seemed to be "oor Charmaine (14) is cooped up in the hoose all week, if I want to take her to Morrisons for some fresh air I will" . There were boyfriends and husbands posting they were going to "kick f**k out the p***k" if he ever spoke to their partner ever again. Anyone who suggested teenage daughters could be left at home or better still could just take a walk for the hour it took were routinely being accused of being peados. There is a fair minority who just refuse to even contemplate following guidance.

[Ron Aldo]

And yet, arguably, that finish line feels further away than when we didn't.

I haven't quite been able to get my head around how, since vaccines were approved, the narrative coming out of the government has been about as negative as it's been throughout.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

28 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I've never ran a marathon, but at least you know where the finish line is. With this it feels like the government are constantly waiting until the finish line is in sight in the distance, then moving it further away.

I thought the finish line was a few months back? You told us, after all..

[No_Problemo]

19 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

Going with “dregs of society” seems like a big classist dog whistle way to frame this.

I haven’t a clue about the rates of infection but is it more prevalent in poorer sections of the population and is a lack of following the rules the most effective explainer for this? I had the impression that big spikes were coming from specific workplaces which suggests a problem with workplace regulations. Even where I work there’s been two separate out breaks in other offices which either means our regulations are shite or everyone is off gallivanting and we’re being more sensible.

 

Yup! People desperate to blame poor people not following the rules for rates being potentially higher among those groups when in reality it would be because they are more likely to be in low paid jobs out working, and living in cramped accommodation. 

Edited January 25, 2021 by No_Problemo

[WhiteRoseKillie]

18 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

Going with “dregs of society” seems like a big classist dog whistle way to frame this.

I haven’t a clue about the rates of infection but is it more prevalent in poorer sections of the population and is a lack of following the rules the most effective explainer for this? I had the impression that big spikes were coming from specific workplaces which suggests a problem with workplace regulations. Even where I work there’s been two separate out breaks in other offices which either means our regulations are shite or everyone is off gallivanting and we’re being more sensible.

Apart from the entirely accurate description of Lockdown One as "the middle classes hid from the virus at home and paid the working class to bring them stuff",  a couple of points:

1. Zero hours contract? Zero pay if you're not at work then.

2. Can't afford a car? Get stuffed into this metal tube with a load of strangers twice a day then.

3. WFH? As a labourer? Aye, right.

Those who are "less well off", i.e. living from pay to pay*, have had to make the choice between complying with precautions or feeding their kids. Not Hyperbole - the UKG is trumpeting their compassion at throwing the poor luxurious hampers to make up for free school meals not happening.

Without a sytem which does not financially penalise those who take the advised precautions, people will continue to have to make this choice. And as it's between the possibility of contracting Covid and the fucking certainty of your kids going hungry, it's not really a choice, is it?

 

*i.e. the vast, vast majority of the UK population.

[Michael W]

1 hour ago, 101 said:

And the gloating really doesn't help, I think the Government should be telling people now that all travel corridors are unlikely to be back by June/July/August. I can't see travel to South American countries especially being back this year without quarantine.

The information is, as it always is, being drip fed. Probably to prevent people from deciding they've had enough when confronted with another four/five/six months or whatever of this shite. Instead it's all been a bit jam tomorrow. 

I'm the opposite and I'd rather just know now because the goalpost shifting really grates. Everytime they say "three weeks" or whatever you already know it's a broken promise. Now they have the NEW VARIANT!!!1 card to play as well, with Hancock taking full advantage of this on Friday to overblown the seriousness of the Kent/English variant without solid foundation. 

[Marshmallo]

Always baffles me people referring to "vermin", "scum", "tinks" etc being in the same places as they are. What does that make you then if you're in exactly the same place?

[Billy Jean King]

In more optimistic news one of the local surgeries have posted that they vaccinated all their over 80s who accepted the appointments as planned over the weekend. Other practice plans to do theirs in two sessions this week.

[Aladdin]

There is some correlation between the local authority areas with higher level of poverty and higher case rates.  You just need to look at the areas at or near the top of the table each day.

As people have said, to infer its because the "dregs" are just wilfully not following the rules is pretty simple minded.  There will likely be a multitude of factors including not being able to work from home, more reliant on public transport etc.

There will no doubt be an interesting study in the future looking at the prevalence in different income brackets as well as ethnicities.

[vikingTON]

13 hours ago, madwullie said:

Personally I think lower paid jobs tending not to be able to done from home (and being out in public) people being worried about getting tested in case they have to take unpaid time off work/ not being able to afford to isolate if positive, having to take public transport due to no car / location of workplace, multiple generational households etc will have far more effect than not strictly adhering to regulations 

Most of the points above are completely valid, but the one above has been widely accepted of late when it seems to be conflating two distinct issues. SSP is of course far too low in general (and needs to be raised for all sickness, not just some temporary special uplift for Covid cases) but how what proportion of those you cite above are really unable to self-isolate for two weeks because of the absolute destitution it would result in?

The piss-poor self-isolating figures for travellers swanning back into the country from abroad, as well as test and trace or the mass testing exercise suggest that there is also a large, and probably much larger section of the population - of all income/class categories - who regard the relative cost of complying with public health measures as being not for them Clive. This should not be considered a valid explanation at all and dealt with instead by a trusty truncheon to the face. 

[101]

59 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I've never ran a marathon, but at least you know where the finish line is. With this it feels like the government are constantly waiting until the finish line is in sight in the distance, then moving it further away.

I think it's more saying you've made it, oh shit no sorry another 20 miles to go, over and over again.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, Aladdin said:

There is some correlation between the local authority areas with higher level of poverty and higher case rates.  You just need to look at the areas at or near the top of the table each day.

As people have said, to infer its because the "dregs" are just wilfully not following the rules is pretty simple minded.  There will likely be a multitude of factors including not being able to work from home, more reliant on public transport etc.

There will no doubt be an interesting study in the future looking at the prevalence in different income brackets as well as ethnicities.

Doesn't match in Inverness when you break it down to neighbourhoods, the poorest have the lowest prevalence. Could be just a quirk because the rates are so low. Presumably someone is doing a match of the Public Health Scotland data with the poverty indices.

[vikingTON]

2 minutes ago, Aladdin said:

There is some correlation between the local authority areas with higher level of poverty and higher case rates.  You just need to look at the areas at or near the top of the table each day.

As people have said, to infer its because the "dregs" are just wilfully not following the rules is pretty simple minded.  There will likely be a multitude of factors including not being able to work from home, more reliant on public transport etc.

There will no doubt be an interesting study in the future looking at the prevalence in different income brackets as well as ethnicities.

The first wave was ripping through Inverclyde (Covid capital of Scotland for the first half of 2020 - I think Glasgow, Renfrewshire etc. have moved up the overall table now) before there were even any restrictions to follow/ignore. The peak deaths was estimated at April 6 or something from the later study of the event, which when you walk all the way backwards to first exposure days before the first symptoms appear puts the period of most significant infection in the middle of March, when Leitch and the gang were preparing to wave 60,000 people to go to an Old Firm game.

That it took greatest hold in the same type of local authority area prior to restrictions being in place - just as it has reliably done in the rest of west-central Scotland ever since - points to structural and not behavioural causes playing the decisive role. 

[Gordon EF]

10 minutes ago, Aladdin said:

There is some correlation between the local authority areas with higher level of poverty and higher case rates.  You just need to look at the areas at or near the top of the table each day.

As people have said, to infer its because the "dregs" are just wilfully not following the rules is pretty simple minded.  There will likely be a multitude of factors including not being able to work from home, more reliant on public transport etc.

There will no doubt be an interesting study in the future looking at the prevalence in different income brackets as well as ethnicities.

This. There are so many factors that go into which areas see higher or lower transmission rates. Human behaviour is a massive one but unpicking that from all the others would be an incredibly difficult task. It's possible, or even probable that poorer sections of society are statistically a bit more likely to ignore the rules overall but like everything, there's very good reason for that. You'll find lower levels of education, lower levels of engagement with sources of news and society in general, fewer options to keep entertained at home, and probably a far lower feeling of having a 'stake' in society in general. These aren't symptoms of the type of people they are, they're symptoms of the disgusting levels of inequality in our society.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Gordon EF

[101]

1 hour ago, pandarilla said:

There's no doubt many of the super rich have been massive dicks during this, and deciding to f**k off to wherever they can to avoid it.

And yes, there's an element of 'making your own rules' that applies to lots of people.

But denying that there's problem with a load of arseholes who are the drugs of society is just weird. It's like doing argumentative gymnastics to hide the issue.

My local asda is a good indicator, as it's in a shitty area, and the 'i don't give a f**k brigade' can be seen fairly regularly.

Interesting that of the supermarkets that said they would enforce mask wearing, asda was the biggest one that refused.

Not only did the super rich and the well off f**k off they took their staff with them I've even seen in my local area mother's who are perfectly capable of cleaning their house have their cleaners out to tidy their house.

As for Asda it's the worst supermarket and no one should be going in there they treat their staff like shit. As for the "I don't give a shit brigade" you can't know their income or their social standing just by where they shop and what they look like.

Wealth is no guarantee of style.

[ICTChris]

Regarding the discussion about the class or income breakdown of the pandemic, the ONS released figures today on the number of deaths among working age people in England and Wales.




Those in the care sector, in the healthcare sector and in elementary occupations had highest death rates, those in managerial and professional sectors had the lowest. Men accounted for two thirds of deaths.

[Alert Mongoose]

Sadly a portion of society struggles to manage in normal times so to expect them to somehow follow rules during this clusterfuck is naive in the extreme.  Generations of kids have been brought up in squalor and a lack of emotional support and guidance which continues on relentlessly. Apportioning blame to them is unfair and utterly pointless. I don’t have a clue how you begin to even attempt to fix it.

[vikingTON]

1 minute ago, Alert Mongoose said:

Sadly a portion of society struggles to manage in normal times so to expect them to somehow follow rules during this clusterfuck is naive in the extreme.  Generations of kids have been brought up in squalor and a lack of emotional support and guidance which continues on relentlessly. Apportioning blame to them is unfair and utterly pointless. I don’t have a clue how you begin to even attempt to fix it.

Just because you grew up in a bad environment does not mean that you lose all agency over your own actions. Structural reasons are much, much more significant that any behavioural explanation anyway, but there's an underlying condescension to that argument which we should steer clear of as well. 

[Ron Aldo]