Johns Hopkins Medical Centre - World Coronavirus infection Map by Country.

[Macca]

well scientific theory varies with the scientists you ask, or they asked.. then there is how totally unprepared they were even though they not only had warning about this one but had warnings over several years but steadfastly reduced out readiness and out stockpiles.. the list kinda goes on.

Well the government has official advisors and they are the people who make the recommendations. They make those recommendations after consulting with other specialists in the various fields involved.

They then report to the Cabinet and PM and offer their predictions, and the various options for action to be taken, and the predicted consequences thereof. No doubt there will be some disagreement amongst the specialists, but the government is not involved in that. They just make decisions based on the final report and the options presented within.

Really if you are looking for a government to blame that surely must be the Chinese. They were warned that wet markets would potentially allow development and spread of such a virus and did nothing. There was nothing that any other nation could do to force the Chinese to take action with regards to that. Added to which governments and organisations - and individuals - tend to be pre-occupied with dealing with the existing problems at hand, not concentrating on preventing or preparing for things that might never happen.

if you're suggesting that a different government would have stockpiled PPE and gone to further lengths as a hedge against a virus maybe happening one day then I have to say I think that is pretty far-fetched. The only governments in the entire world that did this were a handful of Asian nations that had been affected by SARS over a decade ago. And even they had not prepared substantially.

[Marco]

So what do you think they could have done differently, leaving aside the benefit of hindsight? If it has been a Labour government with Corbyn as PM for example?

Well, for starters, whatever you thought of Corbyn, he was, first and foremost, a humanitarian, and the main reason why I voted for him, plus also as an attempt to keep the bigoted anti-Scottish Etonian out, who is utterly devoid of the even the most tenuous grasp of what REAL life is like, or the needs of/what's important to the common man.

Therefore, what Corbyn would've almost certainly done, at the very outset of this pandemic, when it became clear who this virus was killing most [the old and infirm], is concentrated FIRST and FOREMOST on protecting THEM, rather than as usual [as indeed happened in the Grenfell Tower disaster where ordinary people were treated worse than dogs, and victims of typical of Tory policies/priorities], treating them as second-class citizens, and worse, virtually as canon fodder for this virus!

So, to answer your question, it's the UTTERLY SHAMEFUL and SHAMBOLIC way that the care-home situation has been handled during this pandemic [and I don't care WHO was directly responsible for some of the awful decisions made there; as PM and leader of the country, ultimately it's BJ-boy who is to blame/carry the can], and the largely unnecessary and tragic loss of lives there, which have contributed significantly to the overall UK death toll figures.

In that respect. I hear that many relatives of the deceased in care homes will now be suing Hapless Hancock for criminal negligence, and I sincerely hope they take the fucker for every penny he's got! And once a proper enquiry is conducted into other aspects of government negligence during this pandemic, plenty more heads will rightly roll. Starmer is a very able PM in waiting!

Ok, I've got the old man coming round for lunch, so I'll have to shoot off now and help Del prepare... Much laters!

Marco.

[Macca]

Well, for starters, whatever you thought of Corbyn, he was, first and foremost, a humanitarian, and the main reason why I voted for him, plus also as an attempt to keep the bigoted anti-Scottish Etonian out, who is utterly devoid of the even the most tenuous grasp of what REAL life is like, or the needs of/what's important to the common man.

Well fair enough except this bit, I would point out that Corbyn is from a wealthy background, went to the same prep school as Boris, was privately educated through his entire school years and then went straight into politics, so he clearly has no grasp whatsoever of what 'real life' is like. The difference being that unlike Boris who passed his A levels and went on to Oxford to read Classical Philosophy, Corbyn failed his despite the fancy schooling.

I don't actually think either man has a grasp of what 'real life' is like, but then that's true of the vast majority of politicians and indeed the well-off middle-classes in general.

The idea that people will be able to successfully sue Hancock or any other member of the government is absurd. None of what you predict there will happen, just as it didn't with Grenfell.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Well, Chris, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one

Marco.

Accepted.... but lets briefly look at the condition.

IMO having knowledge into narcissism is much better than not having such insight. A very safe and fun demo here, explains how to spot the narcissist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6xU_CPE310

[Marco]

Accepted.... but lets briefly look at the condition.

IMO having knowledge into narcissism is much better than not having such insight. A very safe and fun demo here, explains how to spot the narcissist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6xU_CPE310

I wasn't saying that Trump doesn't sometimes (or even often) display narcissistic behaviour, as clearly he does, but rather I don't believe that he has no empathy whatsoever for his people.

If I genuinely thought that, then I wouldn't support him in any way - and indeed he wouldn't be doing what IMO he's doing now (attempting to dismantle and eradicate the controlling global elite), and make his country (and the world) a better, fairer and safer place, if he was incapable of empathy.

Martin, I'll get to your last post after lunch! It's a beautiful day here, so we'll be enjoying a leisurely (and no doubt boozy) lunch, al fresco!

Marco.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

I wasn't saying that Trump doesn't sometimes (or even often) display narcissistic behaviour, as clearly he does, but rather I don't believe that he has no empathy whatsoever for his people.

If I genuinely thought that, then I wouldn't support him in any way - and indeed he wouldn't be doing what IMO he's doing now (attempting to dismantle and eradicate the controlling global elite), and make his country (and the world) a better, fairer and safer place, if he was incapable of empathy.

Martin, I'll get to your last post after lunch! It's a beautiful day here, so we'll be enjoying a leisurely (and no doubt boozy) lunch, al fresco!

Marco.

Well he is NOT attempting to dismantle and eradicate the controlling global elite, rather the exact opposite. The evidence is seen in the many societal divisive issues the American Civil Liberties Union is dealing with, all which are contrary to the intent of the American constitution. https://www.aclu.org/ He is also representing a political party with every intention of global elitism.

[Gazjam]

I wasn't saying that Trump doesn't sometimes (or even often) display narcissistic behaviour, as clearly he does, but rather I don't believe that he has no empathy whatsoever for his people.

If I genuinely thought that, then I wouldn't support him in any way - and indeed he wouldn't be doing what IMO he's doing now (attempting to dismantle and eradicate the controlling global elite), and make his country (and the world) a better, fairer and safer place, if he was incapable of empathy.

Martin, I'll get to your last post after lunch! It's a beautiful day here, so we'll be enjoying a leisurely (and no doubt boozy) lunch, al fresco!

Marco.

What the actual Hell do you base that on?
Seriously man, have a think.
5 examples please if you can, of where Trump has demonstrated wanting to make America fairer and safer.

Seriously,
are you basing your View on?

The President of the United States is an ignorant, babbling, gibbering, racist, cognitively impaired sociopath.
You don’t see that?

[Marco]

In your humble opinion, and TBH, that was a rather arrogant and intolerant way of addressing me [like I'm some ignorant school kid who needs 'educating'], but I'll let it slide this time. You really need to learn to accept the fact that others are entitled to think differently from you about Trump, and still be 'right', and tolerate their opinion accordingly, without getting all uppity.

So... There's really no point in arguing with you on that subject, because all we'll end up doing it falling out [as we're poles apart in our views], so let's just agree from now on that when the subject of Trump comes up, we'll just ignore each other. Otherwise, I'm afraid we're destined to fallout, and I wouldn't want that.

Deal?

Marco.

[Marco]

Well he is NOT attempting to dismantle and eradicate the controlling global elite, rather the exact opposite.

Sorry, Chris, not my view either, based on what I've observed. So again I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree

Marco.

[Mikeandvan]

Well, for starters, whatever you thought of Corbyn, he was, first and foremost, a humanitarian, and the main reason why I voted for him, plus also as an attempt to keep the bigoted anti-Scottish Etonian out, who is utterly devoid of the even the most tenuous grasp of what REAL life is like, or the needs of/what's important to the common man.

Therefore, what Corbyn would've almost certainly done, at the very outset of this pandemic, when it became clear who this virus was killing most [the old and infirm], is concentrated FIRST and FOREMOST on protecting THEM, rather than as usual [as indeed happened in the Grenfell Tower disaster where ordinary people were treated worse than dogs, and victims of typical of Tory policies/priorities], treating them as second-class citizens, and worse, virtually as canon fodder for this virus!

So, to answer your question, it's the UTTERLY SHAMEFUL and SHAMBOLIC way that the care-home situation has been handled during this pandemic [and I don't care WHO was directly responsible for some of the awful decisions made there; as PM and leader of the country, ultimately it's BJ-boy who is to blame/carry the can], and the largely unnecessary and tragic loss of lives there, which have contributed significantly to the overall UK death toll figures.

In that respect. I hear that many relatives of the deceased in care homes will now be suing Hapless Hancock for criminal negligence, and I sincerely hope they take the fucker for every penny he's got! And once a proper enquiry is conducted into other aspects of government negligence during this pandemic, plenty more heads will rightly roll. Starmer is a very able PM in waiting!

Ok, I've got the old man coming round for lunch, so I'll have to shoot off now and help Del prepare... Much laters!

Marco.

Trouble with voting Corbyn is you get all his Momentum mates in top positions, and Corbyn promised to nationalise the internet, so it would have been 1984 made true, really, look at it now its bad enough, with the 'woke' Stasi in power can you imagine? That is the main reason I didn;t vote Labour, under Corbyn they were well on the wrong side of the culture wars. My mother is currently in a nursing home with many Covid 19 deaths, she has been moved to hospital for her own safety, she tested negative. It seems many of the deaths are in nursing homes, so with relatives been banned the virus must have been carried by staff, symptomless i take it? This can only mean the virus is rife amongst the general population, and that it is really only very old people who must be protected. I think the general lockdown is the wrong route, the old only need protecting, and i don't even mean healthy old either, those over 70 with existing health problems. I see many 70+ year olds in fine shape.