Coronavirus - Page 396

**Hugh** · 16-06-2021, 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that he didn't actually say that Matt Hancock was hopeless. It appears that he meant the position was hopeless. Don't forget that the system was unable to respond to expectations.

Cummings needs to do better if he wants to retain any credibility at all.

---------- Post added at 18:32 ---------- Previous post was at 18:31 ----------

No. But isn't that the point?

https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch...4_1428x214.png

https://dominiccummings.substack.com...otally-****ing

1andrew1 · 17-06-2021, 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

[img]

https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch...4_1428x214.png

https://dominiccummings.substack.com...otally-****ing

Yes, government has successfully managed to fool a few people on this.

Carth · 17-06-2021, 00:29

. . . or is it Dom the Magnificent fooling people?

I can't for the life of me understand why he's killing off any chance he has of a future position in any company of note? Who would risk employing him after showing what he's capable of if he doesn't get his own way?

Maybe he's hoping to write a few books, or maybe do a circuit tour doing stand up ~~comedy~~ seminars on honesty & integrity, or maybe even hoping for a lucrative slot on Oprah . . like others have

**Paul** · 17-06-2021, 02:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Yes they care about those they are looking after, but they can also care about their own health.

So much so that they would rather risk catching a potentially fatal virus, which they could also pass on the people they look after (who fortunately, probably are vaccinated).

Nope, your not winning that argument.

If they really cared about their own health, the evidence that taking the virus is better than not taking it is overwhelming.

pip08456 · 17-06-2021, 07:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

So much so that they would rather risk catching a potentially fatal virus, which they could also pass on the people they look after (who fortunately, probably are vaccinated).

Nope, your not winning that argument.

If they really cared about their own health, the evidence that taking the virus is better than not taking it is overwhelming.

I'd much rather take the vaccine.

OLD BOY · 17-06-2021, 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch...4_1428x214.png

https://dominiccummings.substack.com...otally-****ing

Thanks; I saw that later message on the news last night. The first message was something like 'it's hopeless'.

---------- Post added at 07:19 ---------- Previous post was at 07:16 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

For some friends I know, they would not count that as a better quality of life.

There's a demographic of white collar workers who are genuinely enjoying a better quality of life for the reasons jfman outlined. And other ones too eg more connected to their communities, easier to watch the Euros, keep an eye on the builders, no need to lug internet purchases home, etc.

That was me being mischievous, Andrew!

jfman · 17-06-2021, 07:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth

. . . or is it Dom the Magnificent fooling people?

I can't for the life of me understand why he's killing off any chance he has of a future position in any company of note? Who would risk employing him after showing what he's capable of if he doesn't get his own way?

Maybe he's hoping to write a few books, or maybe do a circuit tour doing stand up ~~comedy~~ seminars on honesty & integrity, or maybe even hoping for a lucrative slot on Oprah . . like others have

Is working for Michael Gove “of note”?

I’m sure he will be fine. Books, media, etc. Being completely loathsome hasn’t harmed Piers Morgan after all.

papa smurf · 17-06-2021, 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

So much so that they would rather risk catching a potentially fatal virus, which they could also pass on the people they look after (who fortunately, probably are vaccinated).

Nope, your not winning that argument.

If they really cared about their own health, the evidence that taking the virus is better than not taking it is overwhelming.

If as you say they[oldies] are vaccinated then you just lost your own argument, unless the vaccines don't work, in which case there would be no point in taking them and you lose again,
can't see how injecting something into your body that you are unsure of and believe is unsafe is caring for your own health

jfman · 17-06-2021, 08:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

If as you say they[oldies] are vaccinated then you just lost your own argument, unless the vaccines don't work, in which case there would be no point in taking them and you lose again,
can't see how injecting something into your body that you are unsure of and believe is unsafe is caring for your own health

You're presenting whether vaccines work as binary. The reality is not the case. Whether they work 60% of the time or 99% of the time you improve the chances for everyone the more people take it. If you are vaccinated and everyone you meet is vaccinated that improves your personal chances than if you (or people you meet) are unvaccinated.

papa smurf · 17-06-2021, 08:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman

You're presenting whether vaccines work as binary. The reality is not the case. Whether they work 60% of the time or 99% of the time you improve the chances for everyone the more people take it. If you are vaccinated and everyone you meet is vaccinated that improves your personal chances than if you (or people you meet) are unvaccinated.

So these part time vaccines only work some of the time ,what if it's not working while a care worker is at work,but old betty's vaccine is chugging along at 90%
is she not protected from serious harm

jonbxx · 17-06-2021, 08:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

If as you say they[oldies] are vaccinated then you just lost your own argument, unless the vaccines don't work, in which case there would be no point in taking them and you lose again,
can't see how injecting something into your body that you are unsure of and believe is unsafe is caring for your own health

I guess it comes down to who you believe more - the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), experts in the field of medicines regulation or your personal beliefs.

Me? I am going with the people who know what they are talking about.

papa smurf · 17-06-2021, 09:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonbxx

I guess it comes down to who you believe more - the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), experts in the field of medicines regulation or your personal beliefs.

Me? I am going with the people who know what they are talking about.

Your choice. Which is the argument isn't it .

**Hugh** · 17-06-2021, 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Your choice. Which is the argument isn't it .

But not when your choice negatively affects others severely - which is why we have things like drink-driving laws, to try and prevent someone’s "personal choice" from killing/injuring others.

papa smurf · 17-06-2021, 09:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

But not when your choice negatively affects others severely - which is why we have things like drink-driving laws, to try and prevent someone’s "personal choice" from killing/injuring others.

What are you going to do hold them at gun point and force it into them.

**Hugh** · 17-06-2021, 09:23

I’m not going to do anything.

I would imagine it will become part of their contract of employment, and not meeting the requirements will mean they are not capable of carrying out their job in a safe manner for their patients & residents - which is the other side of the equation, as the employers would be liable if they hadn’t taken the appropriate steps to safeguard the patients & residents.