Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well this is interesting:

Yup. It’s pretty obvious.

I’m sure certain business interests are involved, but I think we all know what this reopening pressure is really about. And the media isn’t going to dig into and report on astroturfing. The media - on all sides - loves a conflict narrative and they’ve glommed onto this one already.

 Overread wrote:
I wonder if its just a panic to push students back for a week or two to throw masses of exams at them (yay indoor confinement in even bigger groups for an hour or two). Certainly the final year Alevel students and final year GCSE are the most at risk of having this year mess them up considerably with their plans - though I could see Universities also introducing entrance tests if the exam period faulters. Then again we don't know what the University scene will be like come September.

University exams are largely going to be done online this year -- current thinking anyway.

-- and yes there has indeed been the massive amount of " But hang on what if ..." this will all entail.

I wouldn't be too surprised if people who graduate this year wind up being "stigmatised" -- so to speak -- in the future with their qualifications being viewed as perhaps being not quite right --- TBF this could flip t'other way and perhaps courses will be marked more strictly than usual and a lot of people will get lower grades than they were expecting.

Which will of course lead to no end of complaints, appeals and threats of legal action.

Unis are -- currently -- still planning on opening in September as per usual -- even been some talk about sharing out the the years intake across the universities to try and mitigate the dame/share the pain.

That wont last of course, sooner or later one/some of them would/will break ranks and then...

Govt. might of course enforce this to stop this happening .... but given this is only going to be one of 12,345+ plates they're going to have to keep spinning I can't see it being viewed as a priority compared to quite a few other things.

Can only see it being years before the foreign/overseas student numbers recover -- if they ever do.

Wouldn't be too surprised even if we start to see a lot more courses than run entirely online/without a physical presence on campus.

nfe wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Well, my little girl is in nursery, and even getting another 6 weeks would be beneficial.. She only had 2 months there and was enjoying it a lot, now she's stuck at home she's climbing the walls. The nursery is on the base, and only used by service personnel who live in the married quarters (so they aren't travelling around the country at weekends like the singlys) so I think it's fairly low risk there anyway.

That's a curious case. Are they run by the military or are they private units that just happen to be in the base? I guess there might be special legislation for these kind of anomalies.

I'm not sure who their governing body is, but it's located on camp and serves exclusively the families on the unit (as far as I'm aware)

tneva82 wrote:
That's what trump tried to set it up for. Backfired spectacularly for him. Can't even get group he sets up to take blame in case reopening backfires to actually agree for immediate reopening

Not that surprising though. CEO's are careful about their PR image. Being linked to mass deaths isn't good for their business. trump ain't getting others to take blame for that for his sake that easily.

Trump is very clearly trying to set the governors up now, my guess is that he realized he couldn't scapegoat business leaders, and it coincides with his shift from "The President can reopen the country" to "the Governors are responsible".

Kind of a win/win for him now, if a governor reopens and it goes smoothly, he gets to say it was because of the criteria and guidance he issued, if it blows up then he says the governor didnt follow his guidance.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1270841/boris-johnson-coronavirus-uk-news-cobra-meetings-covid19-government-response

Good job. Celebrating chinese new years is obviously more important than preparing for corona.

With express and times daring to crititize tories it's grim indeed.

chaos0xomega wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
That's what trump tried to set it up for. Backfired spectacularly for him. Can't even get group he sets up to take blame in case reopening backfires to actually agree for immediate reopening

Not that surprising though. CEO's are careful about their PR image. Being linked to mass deaths isn't good for their business. trump ain't getting others to take blame for that for his sake that easily.

Trump is very clearly trying to set the governors up now, my guess is that he realized he couldn't scapegoat business leaders, and it coincides with his shift from "The President can reopen the country" to "the Governors are responsible".

Kind of a win/win for him now, if a governor reopens and it goes smoothly, he gets to say it was because of the criteria and guidance he issued, if it blows up then he says the governor didnt follow his guidance.

Exactly. Also, in the places like my state who are protesting the over-quarantine, if there is a resurgence of infections after opening up the economies, they can simply pivot to protesting how the governors were morons in the way they opened the states back up, and now the once overly-draconian leaders are now responsible for the deaths.

One nice thing is that this is proving that we are absolutely the cause of pollution. Cities are rapidly showing vast improvements in air quality, in just two months, which means that we could make such things permanent over spans of 5-10 years instead with very little change to public life, versus the slamming of a halt to everything in two months.

Without getting into politics, I think you guys are overestimating the competence of those involved. I think governors who are doing a good job will continue to, and I do not think the White House will be able to stop the natural connection people will make. Or put differently, people will blame or praise the governor as the 'closer' figure, which I feel is actually appropriate.

Very little change ? Like what ? It took the destruction if the entire world economy to take some clouds and fog away

 godardc wrote:
Very little change ? Like what ? It took the destruction if the entire world economy to take some clouds and fog away

I agree that the “very little change” thing is a bit out of place. It was a massive change in the lifestyle of the world.

That said, It did yield very real and tangible results. It’s more then just “clouds and fog”. We as a race are the cause of a LOT of pollution. I think it’s a bit of a wake up call to see what happens when everything comes to a screeching halt, and what the environment does. It gets better.

I think as we ramp back up to “normal” we need to keep this in mind. How can we have both a global economy AND clean air? We want both.

You guys are only reading half of what I typed. I said a small change could see all the various economies still function while still getting what we have seen over two months to happen, but over a few years. Because obviously what enabled this couple months change is not in any way sustainable.

But it still shows that yes, dropping all the crap we put in the air would actually make a difference, even if it took longer because life would still have to go on.

tneva82 wrote:


With express and times daring to crititize tories it's grim indeed.

Indeed, not the papers I'd expect to run with that story. It will be interesting to see if it gathers steam over the coming days, or if it gets buried under the day to day madness that seems to have become the new normal. But the Tories do like to keep there knives sharp, and have recent form for turning on themselves at a time of national crisis so who knows?

 AegisGrimm wrote:
You guys are only reading half of what I typed. I said a small change could see all the various economies still function while still getting what we have seen over two months to happen, but over a few years. Because obviously what enabled this couple months change is not in any way sustainable.

But it still shows that yes, dropping all the crap we put in the air would actually make a difference, even if it took longer because life would still have to go on.

Im no car expert, so correct me if im wrong, cars burn more fuel and put out more exhaust when going slow and stop and go.
Imagine if all the people that can work from home, start doing so more, as shown with much right now, allowing those people who CANT work from home faster commutes and less pollution.
Granted, none of this will happen, but i can hope.
Heck, imagine if this comes with a massive change in schooling aswell, with school now being done from home more.

Must say Captain Tom has become quite the national hero. Bless him.

All those papers talking about cobra meetings are just playing on people's lack of knowledge. The pm doesn't chair every cobra meeting.. Sometimes they are deputised to others who may have more expertise in whatever is being discussed.

And those talking about the failure to take action, they locked the country down as soon as the imperial college paper came out. How much quicker could they be? If they had done it sooner, someone would've said, is this backed by any science? to which the answer would have been no, and there would have been uproar.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
All those papers talking about cobra meetings are just playing on people's lack of knowledge. The pm doesn't chair every cobra meeting.. Sometimes they are deputised to others who may have more expertise in whatever is being discussed.

Which is fine, except the issue I'm reading isn't that he didn't chair them, it's that he didn't flat-out didn't attend them.

He doesn't always attend.. That's what I'm saying.. Often they are held, and then the info is relayed back to him later.

Erm....isn’t this getting a bit too political?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Erm....isn’t this getting a bit too political?

This whole situation is inherently political, politics are the whole reason we are in this mess.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Erm....isn’t this getting a bit too political?

Its a fine line for sure. But when politicians and politics are major factors in the responses to and effects of Covid-19 its unavoidable.

Indeed. The politics should really be kept on the back burner, (in reality aswell as in here) until we are at a more stable state. There are higher priorities, and the government is effectively leaderless at the current time. Attempted point scoring should be avoided, but it inevitably won't.

I will say that this has been an interesting time. A government I generally support has done some questionable things that I don't support, and the opposition has done some things I would agree with (pressing for a lockdown exit strategy).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Erm....isn’t this getting a bit too political?

This whole situation is inherently political, politics are the whole reason we are in this mess.

Are they? I'd put the blame more on the poor sanitation in those wet markets, or the facility that had a leak? (I don't know which is true) in China, higher up the blame list for sure.

Well, politics didn't cause the origin (that is a good reason to talk about wet markets in a separate thread.) I'm actually quite impressed that we have been drifting in and out of the edges of politics in the thread lately, and no one has really started any problems. It's been pretty well thought-out.

Right now it's hard to not mention politics because currently in most of our respective countries, politics are playing a huge part in the steps being taken because of the phases of response we are currently in, because things are settling down from just pure panic.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Well, politics didn't cause the origin (that is a good reason to talk about wet markets in a separate thread.) I'm actually quite impressed that we have been drifting in and out of the edges of politics in the thread lately, and no one has really started any problems. It's been pretty well thought-out.

Right now it's hard to not mention politics because currently in most of our respective countries, politics are playing a huge part in the steps being taken because of the phases of response we are currently in, because things are settling down from just pure panic.

Never even heard of wet makets before this.
I cant imagine just hanging hunks of beef is sanitary.

Yeah. Then again, some Americans wear shoes around the house, and probably most of the rest of the world would find that gross. We all live in some kind of glass house.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Without getting into politics, I think you guys are overestimating the competence of those involved. I think governors who are doing a good job will continue to, and I do not think the White House will be able to stop the natural connection people will make. Or put differently, people will blame or praise the governor as the 'closer' figure, which I feel is actually appropriate.

Unfortunately American politics are what they are, and blame will be assessed on partisan lines based on the eye of the beholder, and not on competence or lack thereof.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 godardc wrote:
Very little change ? Like what ? It took the destruction if the entire world economy to take some clouds and fog away

Several things have been demonstrated.

1) Yes, rush hour is destroying the environment.

2) A LOT of businesses have remained open (for certain definitions of 'open') by having their workers telecommute. This shows that you don't need everyone to come in and work in the office to make the modern business world work.

3) Which means they don't need to RENT or BUILD that large workplace for everyone to work in, saving those businesses lots of money.

which leads us to:

4) That means a sizable percentage of that environment-destroying commute is unnecessary and can be eliminated... and doing so will actually SAVE businesses money instead of COSTING them money.

Win/win right there.

 Vulcan wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Very little change ? Like what ? It took the destruction if the entire world economy to take some clouds and fog away

Several things have been demonstrated.

1) Yes, rush hour is destroying the environment.

2) A LOT of businesses have remained open (for certain definitions of 'open') by having their workers telecommute. This shows that you don't need everyone to come in and work in the office to make the modern business world work.

3) Which means they don't need to RENT or BUILD that large workplace for everyone to work in, saving those businesses lots of money.

which leads us to:

4) That means a sizable percentage of that environment-destroying commute is unnecessary and can be eliminated... and doing so will actually SAVE businesses money instead of COSTING them money.

Win/win right there.

Not so good for businesses that make their money from constructing office buildings, of course...





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
You guys are only reading half of what I typed. I said a small change could see all the various economies still function while still getting what we have seen over two months to happen, but over a few years. Because obviously what enabled this couple months change is not in any way sustainable.

But it still shows that yes, dropping all the crap we put in the air would actually make a difference, even if it took longer because life would still have to go on.

Im no car expert, so correct me if im wrong, cars burn more fuel and put out more exhaust when going slow and stop and go.
Imagine if all the people that can work from home, start doing so more, as shown with much right now, allowing those people who CANT work from home faster commutes and less pollution.
Granted, none of this will happen, but i can hope.
Heck, imagine if this comes with a massive change in schooling aswell, with school now being done from home more.

It's entirely possible that there will be a move in this direction, for office-based workplaces at least. One of Oz's major telecommunications companies has already announced that they are planning on keeping the work-from-home arrangements permanent for their call centre staff.


It's less likely to remain a permanent change for schools, as the social aspect of going to school is an important parts of childrens' development. Although I can see some people choosing to stick with home schooling if they find that their children do better in that environment, as some inevitably will (I suspect that I would have...)

 insaniak wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Very little change ? Like what ? It took the destruction if the entire world economy to take some clouds and fog away

Several things have been demonstrated.

1) Yes, rush hour is destroying the environment.

2) A LOT of businesses have remained open (for certain definitions of 'open') by having their workers telecommute. This shows that you don't need everyone to come in and work in the office to make the modern business world work.

3) Which means they don't need to RENT or BUILD that large workplace for everyone to work in, saving those businesses lots of money.

which leads us to:

4) That means a sizable percentage of that environment-destroying commute is unnecessary and can be eliminated... and doing so will actually SAVE businesses money instead of COSTING them money.

Win/win right there.

Not so good for businesses that make their money from constructing office buildings, of course...

True. But let's face it, a parking lot isn't exactly great for the environment either.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Well, politics didn't cause the origin (that is a good reason to talk about wet markets in a separate thread.) I'm actually quite impressed that we have been drifting in and out of the edges of politics in the thread lately, and no one has really started any problems. It's been pretty well thought-out.

Right now it's hard to not mention politics because currently in most of our respective countries, politics are playing a huge part in the steps being taken because of the phases of response we are currently in, because things are settling down from just pure panic.

Never even heard of wet makets before this.
I cant imagine just hanging hunks of beef is sanitary.

Beef? Have you not seen photos of the places? It's more than that. Live and dead animals like dogs, frogs, bats (obviously) snakes, insects, duck fetus eggs.. all just sitting there on streets, blood and fluid everywhere. Look them up on YouTube.. I think some of them aren't that bad, and are slightly more sanitary, being more like street food markets, but some of them are grim. Especially when modern refrigeration is so readily available.

Yeah, in cages stacked on top of each other, and with gravity being what is, the animals in the bottom cages are literally in gak creek.

A wet market is simply one selling perishable consumables as opposed to a dry market selling other stuff - clothes or ornaments or whatever. That's it.

Some are unsanitary. Some aren't. Even the ones selling live and slaughtered animals are popular across a lot of the world and can be perfectly sanitary. I buy from them a lot in the Middle East.

No doubt, with a good dose of exoticising fantasy and yellow peril, in the western imagination it will now exclusively refer to side by side rabid dogs and prawns in a TV-Medieval setting populated by babbling characters in cone hats.

Granted, but you can go online and see the grim ones in real life video footage. its nothing to do with some imagined yellow peril. I did clarify in my statement that not all food markets are bad or particularly unhygienic, which is why the bad ones you see are even more unacceptable.