poker news
blondepedia
card room
tournament schedule
uk results
galleries
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
April 28, 2024, 10:05:03 PM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
Order through Amazon and help blonde Poker
2272618
Posts in
66755
Topics by
16946
Members
Latest Member:
KobeTaylor
blonde poker forum
Community Forums
The Lounge
COVID19
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
« previous
next »
Pages:
1
...
167
168
169
170
[
171
]
172
173
174
175
...
305
Author
Topic: COVID19 (Read 359687 times)
MintTrav
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3401
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2550 on:
May 27, 2020, 03:08:37 AM »
Quote from: neeko on May 26, 2020, 12:00:21 PM
The UK has opened its schools, cafes, shops etc etc later than most of Europe, I am not sure that proves we are doing a better job.
China locked the doors of tower blocks to ensure its lockdown was good, not sure that the UK not doing that made them worse.
The UKs 2 errors were
1. “protect the NHS” rather than kill as few people as possible, and
2. too late a lockdown.
Keeping more patients in hospital and running out of ICU beds in a few hospitals around the country would have been better than emptying hospitals then have everyone die in care homes. But
politics and the press has canonised the NHS
to such an extent that it was more important to kill extra people than have hospitals running at 100%+ capacity.
I saw a German article recently that said that one of the reasons the UK responded so poorly was because it has lumbered itself with a national health service, which I thought was an interesting view, considering how untouchable the concept is here.
Logged
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8089
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2551 on:
May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM »
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
«
Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 08:26:50 AM by Cf
»
Logged
Blue text
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2552 on:
May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM »
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Logged
Pokerpops
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 1428
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2553 on:
May 27, 2020, 10:05:38 AM »
Jonathan Pie’s take
https://youtu.be/tDnGQemzf2s
Logged
"More than at any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
Doobs
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 16577
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2554 on:
May 27, 2020, 10:35:14 AM »
Conservative lead as small as it has been for quite a while.
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1265390806556426241
Logged
Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
RickBFA
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2001
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2555 on:
May 27, 2020, 11:18:08 AM »
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
It wasn’t his second home.
We all have/had the same option to protect the interests of a young child. So on the isolation point, there were no special rules for Cummings.
Logged
Geo the Sarge
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 5528
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2556 on:
May 27, 2020, 11:38:23 AM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes where they then contract covid and die. It really wasn't that hard to imagine tbh.
Geo
Logged
When you get..........give. When you learn.......teach
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2557 on:
May 27, 2020, 11:48:07 AM »
Quote from: Geo the Sarge on May 27, 2020, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes where they then contract covid and die. It really wasn't that hard to imagine tbh.
Geo
As individual citizens, which is what was being discussed, Cummings/Wakefield are pretty bad. As a government policy on the other hand, I think you have correctly identified the worst thing possible. Key to mention that lots of them were unwell and were moving untested, from the hospitals to the care homes.
Logged
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8089
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2558 on:
May 27, 2020, 11:54:16 AM »
Quote from: RickBFA on May 27, 2020, 11:18:08 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
It wasn’t his second home.
We all have/had the same option to protect the interests of a young child. So on the isolation point, there were no special rules for Cummings.
I mean therein lies one of the problems we now have. People thinking having a child means feel free to travel around the country. Not only was it against the rules then but it still is. For the reasons mentioned in my last paragraph which you didn't respond to.
(I read but not entirely sure if it's accurate that he part owns the farm where he stays. Either way referring to it as a 2nd home or not I think is splitting hairs a bit)
Logged
Blue text
arbboy
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 13285
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2559 on:
May 27, 2020, 12:10:41 PM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 11:48:07 AM
Quote from: Geo the Sarge on May 27, 2020, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes where they then contract covid and die. It really wasn't that hard to imagine tbh.
Geo
As individual citizens, which is what was being discussed, Cummings/Wakefield are pretty bad. As a government policy on the other hand, I think you have correctly identified the worst thing possible. Key to mention that lots of them were unwell and were moving untested, from the hospitals to the care homes.
This is exactly what happened with my gran when she was released from hospital initially on a non covid issue back home without being tested and passed covid onto my mother who was caring for her in her house. Then 3 days later was readmitted to hospital with covid and tested positive. The only plus point being my mother was only caring for her and wasn't a care worker in a home moving from care home to care home spreading it. She simply stayed at gran's house isolating for two weeks until she was better thankfully.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2560 on:
May 27, 2020, 12:42:11 PM »
Quote from: arbboy on May 27, 2020, 12:10:41 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 11:48:07 AM
Quote from: Geo the Sarge on May 27, 2020, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes where they then contract covid and die. It really wasn't that hard to imagine tbh.
Geo
As individual citizens, which is what was being discussed, Cummings/Wakefield are pretty bad. As a government policy on the other hand, I think you have correctly identified the worst thing possible. Key to mention that lots of them were unwell and were moving untested, from the hospitals to the care homes.
This is exactly what happened with my gran when she was released from hospital initially on a non covid issue back home without being tested and passed covid onto my mother who was caring for her in her house. Then 3 days later was readmitted to hospital with covid and tested positive. The only plus point being my mother was only caring for her and wasn't a care worker in a home moving from care home to care home spreading it. She simply stayed at gran's house isolating for two weeks until she was better thankfully.
Such a terrible and sad situation mate, great credit to your mum for acting so responsibly. I’m so pleased she has fully recovered.
Logged
Doobs
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 16577
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2561 on:
May 27, 2020, 01:20:19 PM »
https://www.ft.com/video/e82b5a00-3ad5-4d2c-9703-ff14942aa5b1
This is long but it is a lawyer going through the Cummings Statement. What is said, why it is said, where it fails etc. It feels pretty balanced to me.
Logged
Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2562 on:
May 27, 2020, 01:56:04 PM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 11:48:07 AM
Quote from: Geo the Sarge on May 27, 2020, 11:38:23 AM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on May 27, 2020, 08:49:02 AM
Quote from: Cf on May 27, 2020, 08:23:41 AM
Quote from: RickBFA on May 26, 2020, 11:42:52 PM
Quote from: The Camel on May 26, 2020, 11:14:27 PM
Lewis Goodall on NN cut through all the bullshit.
If his wife had COVID symptoms they should not have travelled.
If she did not have COVID symptoms there were no exceptional circumstances.
I think it easy to get very tribal about stuff like this especially as this is Cummings.
I can see the logical of protecting the welfare of a 4 year old child. Given the guidance does give everyone the leeway to deal with that situation, I think the isolation in Durham is actually reasonable. Everyone does have the option to do what Cummings did - it just happens we dont tend to have an empty property on our parents estate to use (but that’s just his good fortune).
It’s the trip to Barnard Castle which is the bit that looks irresponsible. That’s the killer for him along with the negative PR for his Government and the damage to the lockdown.
The combination of those last points is why he should resign for me.
Who is getting tribal? Polling shows the view that what he did was wrong is held by the majority of the population, inc Tory and leave voters. Even right wing newspapers are running headlines criticising and ridiculing the whole thing.
Instead of giving leeway the guidance explicitly stated to not isolate in second homes. I don't know how that could be clearer. Having a child is not an exceptional circumstance. Millions of families have children. Were they all exempt from the rules too? Will they be going forward? Of course not. Hence the government have avoided saying so whilst still contorting to try and somehow say what he did was ok.
As for it being logic and within the spirit of the rules this is clearly not the case. He took his infected family from an area with a high infection rate to an area with a low infection rate. They then ended up in a hospital there and helped (or at the very least risked) spread the virus to an area with a low infection rate. One of the entire points, if not the main point, of the lockdown is to prevent this. If the millions of families with children did the same as may as well have not had a lockdown at all.
Morning all
The final paragraph nails it. From a contain the disease point of view, it’s hard to imagine what you could do, that was worse, than taking the disease to a hospital in a part of the country with low incidence of Covid at the time.
Moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes where they then contract covid and die. It really wasn't that hard to imagine tbh.
Geo
As individual citizens, which is what was being discussed, Cummings/Wakefield are pretty bad. As a government policy on the other hand, I think you have correctly identified the worst thing possible. Key to mention that lots of them were unwell and were moving untested, from the hospitals to the care homes.
OK, I don’t have anything worse that a citizen who isn’t acting maliciously (I hope no one is suggesting he was acting maliciously) could do, than take Coronavirus to a hospital in a part of the country with a tiny incidence of Coronavirus. Can anyone think of something?
Logged
jakally
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2009
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2563 on:
May 27, 2020, 02:00:28 PM »
Hundreds of places worse to take Coronavirus than a hospital.
Logged
Cf
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8089
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #2564 on:
May 27, 2020, 02:09:13 PM »
Quote from: jakally on May 27, 2020, 02:00:28 PM
Hundreds of places worse to take Coronavirus than a hospital.
It's the other part of the country that's the main issue.
Logged
Blue text
Pages:
1
...
167
168
169
170
[
171
]
172
173
174
175
...
305
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Poker Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Rail
===> past blonde Bashes
===> Best of blonde
=> Diaries and Blogs
=> Live Tournament Updates
=> Live poker
===> Live Tournament Staking
=> Internet Poker
===> Online Tournament Staking
=> Poker Hand Analysis
===> Learning Centre
-----------------------------
Community Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Lounge
=> Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
Loading...