Jump to content
IGNORED

Vaccine Passport - Plan B

Bristol Rob

By Bristol Rob
in Football Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

Kid in the Riot

Kid in the Riot

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 2015 said:

It is rather funny that those who despise the Tories on here and despise Boris Johnson yet still go along with every restriction he puts in place and his 'opposition' support him in doing so. 

Wouldn't trust Johnson to put my bins out. The medical experts on the other hand....

That point has been made plenty of times on this thread. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lenred

lenred

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, 2015 said:

It is rather funny that those who despise the Tories on here and despise Boris Johnson yet still go along with every restriction he puts in place and his 'opposition' support him in doing so. 

I don't believe a word any politician or scientist come out with anymore - they are all corrupted by power, personal agenda's and money in my opinion.

Public and personal health is not a case of party politics for grown ups. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BTRFTG

BTRFTG

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

I'm actually not conflating wealth (which may be held overseas) with income, but corporations and UK-based multi-millionaire and billionaires make a lot of income on UK-based transactions. The UK generates a lot of cash. I generate and derive cash from UK-based commercial activity; Richard Branson derives even more.  This income is reachable and calculatable and much of it, in the case of Branson or Apple or Amazon or whoever, is currently untaxed because of arrangements in British overseas territories that HM Government is quite happy to continue.

It is just rubbish to conclude no more money can be raised from super-profits made within the UK and the cost of developing the NHS into a fit-for-purpose system has to by necessity fall disproportionately on the average Joe. You need only to have experienced the state health services in numerous northern European countries - or even just across La Manche - to conclude that a better-funded health system needn't financially cripple the inhabitants. 

I'm afraid you did as you have here, conflating personal and commercial taxation.

You've actually answered your own question as to why commercial taxation is useless in underpinning the costs of running a health service - there's no way to guarantee income. Turnover is already taxed by VAT so driving away business isn't a good idea, profits targeted by corporation tax, but you can't guarantee how much profit a company makes in any given period. If companies chose to reinvest in the business then whilst shareholders benefit the Chancellor sees nothing.

I didn't conclude increasing commercial taxation was out of the question but the types of money you'd need for the NHS would require legislation beyond these shores and I'm uncertain (other than declaring war) how any UK Government might guarantee delivering that? Government could unilaterally increase tax at risk businesses would decant elsewhere, as they've indicated they would.

As for Northern European healthcare, which countries were you thinking of? In respect of the larger nations UK public funding is on a par if not higher than most (save in those nations a far higher percentage of citizens additionally contribute via the private sector, which is what we in the UK appear reluctant to do.) In places like Scandinavia you first have to factor in population size and demographics, they're very small cf UK, but other than Norway and it's vast oil wealth, public investment isn't so dissimilar, though they, too, pay more than UK via private charging as, slightly more than here, not all 'free at point of access' is actually 'free'.

Remember, the USA has by a country mile the highest per capita PUBLIC funding of healthcare in the world (more than double the UK,) yet folks love to deride what's on offer there. We moan how expensive healthcare is there , the same expense over here most don't wish to pay via direct taxation.

Edited by BTRFTG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eddie Hitler

Eddie Hitler

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Riaz said:

You are a conspiracy theorist if you think for yourself and dont believe EVERYTHING you are told.

 

Yup.

As I posted earlier a major drive by the government, supported by most of the media, has been to try to polarise opinion so as to portray it that unless you believe and follow everything that the government pumps out then you are some kind of rabid "anti-vaxxer" who idolises Piers Corbyn.

Similar emotive language is used to frame the debate upon Climate Change (rebranded from Man Made Global Warming) where to question any of it has you labelled a "denier"; the godless 21st century equivalent of a heretic for not following the orthodoxy of the new religions be they averting Climate Change or prostrating oneself upon the altar of the NHS.

And, as ever in such debates, it is the empty vessels that make the most noise.

Personally I have "followed the science" throughout.

Last year that made me a good disciple because I was following all of the rules.

This year, through following the science with regard to not being injected with a vaccine until it has undergone the full standard medical trials which take a minimum of five years to complete, I am now an outcast heretic.

It feels like the old definition of sanity: having the same mental illnesses as your neighbours.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BTRFTG

BTRFTG

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

standard medical trials which take a minimum of five years to complete,

Sorry to be the bringer of bad news but there is no minimum term for trials and approvals. As a Stage One Trial guinea pig I should know.

You do realize, don't you, that were we to all adopt your degree of caution in refusing to take any medication that hadn't been fully assured no new medicines would ever become available? How might you propose scientists test and evaluate using your logic?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2015

2015

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

As I posted earlier a major drive by the government, supported by most of the media, has been to try to polarise opinion so as to portray it that unless you believe and follow everything that the government pumps out then you are some kind of rabid "anti-vaxxer" who idolises Piers Corbyn.

Similar emotive language is used to frame the debate upon Climate Change (rebranded from Man Made Global Warming) where to question any of it has you labelled a "denier"; the godless 21st century equivalent of a heretic for not following the orthodoxy of the new religions be they averting Climate Change or prostrating oneself upon the altar of the NHS.

It's just another way for the elites and the billionaires to divide the 'plebs' and make more money from it at the same time. Because who will really be effected by charges driving into Bath or Bristol? The workers. Who will really be effected by having to buy electric cars? The workers, those who can't afford it.

When the media and journalists call for lockdown they don't have to worry in their nice big stately houses do they? Whilst us normies live in overcrowded areas with not much greenery around and in an overcrowded house or flat. 

Basically if you're rich none of these ideas or goals really effect you, it will always be the poor who suffer and it will always be those who speak out against the popular belief who are demonised.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bard

The Bard

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, 2015 said:

It is rather funny that those who despise the Tories on here and despise Boris Johnson yet still go along with every restriction he puts in place and his 'opposition' support him in doing so. 

I don't believe a word any politician or scientist come out with anymore - they are all corrupted by power, personal agenda's and money in my opinion.

The old 'All politicians are the same' bullshit. 

Quite simply they aren't are they? They differ and If a population believes that they're all the same, they will end up with the most corrupt, least competent and the biggest liars in charge. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrahamC

GrahamC

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, The Bard said:

The old 'All politicians are the same' bullshit. 

Quite simply they aren't are they? They differ and If a population believes that they're all the same, they will end up with the most corrupt, least competent and the biggest liars in charge. 

 

Convenient, because it was the strategy that got Johnson elected.

Turnout is lower in poorer areas where this myth has an impact.

Transformation change took place between’97 and 2010, this sort of nonsense attempts to deny it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2015

2015

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Bard said:

The old 'All politicians are the same' bullshit. 

Quite simply they aren't are they? They differ and If a population believes that they're all the same, they will end up with the most corrupt, least competent and the biggest liars in charge. 

 

I don't believe many in the current Parliament are much different -  Left, Centre or Right they don't really have much care or interest on what the general public think so in that regard they are all the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eddie Hitler

Eddie Hitler

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Sorry to be the bringer of bad news but there is no minimum term for trials and approvals. As a Stage One Trial guinea pig I should know.

You do realize, don't you, that were we to all adopt your degree of caution in refusing to take any medication that hadn't been fully assured no new medicines would ever become available? How might you propose scientists test and evaluate using your logic?

 

Of course new medicines would become available because people volunteer for the limited numbers trials leaving the majority as the control group.

This time the trials are topsy turvy because the trial group is the majority and the control group the minority.

If you think that we somehow know the side effects of the several vaccines already then have a look at the complexities of the Dengue fever vaccine which were certainly not foreseen in its first year of issuance.

The human body is an incredibly complex mechanism and viruses mutate unpredictability; the only sure way to be able to call relative safety of these vaccines as I would claim for the influenza vaccine is volume, achieved, and time, and there are years to go yet.

Assuming that the outcomes of the trials lead to identifying which of the competing vaccines is the safest in a few years then I will start having that particular vaccine on a yearly basis as I have done with the influenza vaccine for the last twenty years.

That is hardly being an "anti-vaxxer"; it is following the science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Bard

The Bard

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, 2015 said:

I don't believe many in the current Parliament are much different -  Left, Centre or Right they don't really have much care or interest on what the general public think so in that regard they are all the same. 

Think you need to digest what Graham C said above...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chinapig

chinapig

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

1) The majority of the population are now vaccinated

2) The vaccines are not 100% effective

3) Its very very simple Maths

Quite, this is commonly misunderstood where people don't understand risk and probability.

It's like saying the majority who die in car accidents were wearing seat belts therefore seat belts aren't effective as per this:

https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/sep/19/take-care-with-claims-about-unvaccinated-case-rates-covid

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NcnsBcfc

NcnsBcfc

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

Not sure that this should be in the football section. As ever politics, right of speech and dubious information sources prevail. A lot of indecision revolves around everyone being right, and having an opinion. So they decide to not decide. So not to upset people. Then around in circles we go and everyone goes off in their own direction anyway. Democratic dissent. 

I don't much care for politics or the political parties and empty gesturing. Most people in this country are pretty balanced and want the same things. As political cycles are too short to enact any notable change, there are areas such as NHS and education that should have become all party commissions years ago as they are in the national interests and not political footballs (see I had to get it back onto football) . These areas need decades of planning to make change. 

 

 

 

Completely agree that this shouldn't be in the football section anymore.

As for the whole covid conversation, it's a bit like the Brexit one now.

Whichever way you voted in 2016, is generally the way you feel about the subject now. I've not really met anybody who has changed their initial view of whether to leave or remain. They will continue to look to the media & information/statistics that back up their own views (confirmational bias perhaps, but understandable).

The same scenario is being taken now over Covid and vaccines. The two sides are or course polarised, and both unlikely to suddenly start agreeing with one another.

I realised years ago to respect other people's views on the above subjects, even if I don't necessarily agree with them. The times we find ourselves in at the moment are unprecedented, and society has probably never felt so divided.

It does though feel from my own work, that people seem to be exhausted; and seriously starting to lose whatever mental, and physical strength they have left. The days of collective well being, and "Clap for Carers" are long gone.

It's been a long 5 years since that 2016 vote. Will society ever come back together again after all the upheavals we've all been through; I'm not so sure.

One thing I do know is, that I go on the Football chat forum to read about Football, and this topic feels a long way away from that at the moment.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pillred

pillred

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Just going to leave this here

1st Omicron deaths reported in the UK 

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-12-13/operations-may-be-cancelled-as-booster-jab-scheme-ramps-up-to-tackle-omicron

Not so 'mild' then. 

 

We don't know the age of the person or their underlying health, so let's not speculate one way or the other until we know the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eddie Hitler

Eddie Hitler

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Just going to leave this here

1st Omicron deaths reported in the UK 

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-12-13/operations-may-be-cancelled-as-booster-jab-scheme-ramps-up-to-tackle-omicron

Not so 'mild' then. 

 

 

WITH is the key word here.

Covid acts like flu in being the "old person's friend" when they are already terminally ill.

Edited by Eddie Hitler
Missed an RRRRRR
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eddie Hitler

Eddie Hitler

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

 

I'm sorry that you have resorted someone's mum, dad, brother, sister, family members death to a mechanical posit

It's pretty depressing that humans will try to do this over death. 

Someone has passed because of this, and people still trying to argue the toss, is very disheartening. 

I hate Boris Johnson with a passion, however i want to prevent people dying needlessly and senselessly. 

That means rather than trying to wangle things to fit some very odd beliefs, people have to start taking responsibility for their actions, or in this threads case lack thereof. 

 

This has happened with influenza every year for centuries.

This idea that Covid rewrites all the rules is simply wrong; it is merely the most recent human virus.

It could equally have been Covid that we had for centuries and then influenza crops up.

Covid is just another virus which a more sensible society would simply learn to live with rather than being the new bogey man to terrify the simple.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonyTonyTony

TonyTonyTony

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Covid is just another virus which a more sensible society would simply learn to live with rather than being the new bogey man to terrify the simple.

What does that statement actually mean though?

The virus still has the potential to knock over the health service. Are you happy for that to happen? Presumably not, in which case there has to be some rules of engagement, which is precisely the situation we are in. You could make the argument that we need more hospitals to cope if we want to be "free" but that is not a short, nor medium term solution is it? You cant just shit out a new hospital and trained staff.

Its you that has the simplistic view

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riaz

Riaz

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, lenred said:

What’s suspicious?

no deaths elsewhere, including in south africa where it originated from.

But suddenly we have a death from it, at the same time as the government wants to bring in restrictions.

Anyone who believes this shit, would believe anything they are told. Beyond naive.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...