Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

[Teaboy]

The poster concerned, boasted about ordering three pints with a burger, clearly that's not in the sprit of the law, that is not normal behaviour, they were acting to get around the law and stay in the pub longer. They mentioned spoons were serving drinks after people had eaten, and seemed happy about that, despite it clearly being against the law.

Actually this isn't true. The law is so poorly defined that those responsible for it can't even explain it to a basic level. This is clearly by design so all the blame has and will be shifted onto the business and its customers rather than the government. Its been a constant tactic throughout this and we've decried it when this disgusting government have used it time and time again against the general populace, why should we support that tactic now?

I said stupid laws invoke stupid responses and yesterday proved exactly that. My neighbour is a pub manager. There is nowhere to go to get clear guidance on the rules and there is no one to call. You're on your own and its by design.

I am sick of people looking for loopholes in the law, and pubs & other businesses breaking the law, sure it's shit, but we are in the middle of a pandemic, so suck it up until we start coming out the other side, which hopefully will be only a few months away now.

Like many industries the hospitality industry has time and time again been thrown under the bus. Unending changes in laws and what can and can't be done and usually all last minute costing millions in waste.

You must close. Time to reopen and we're going to use government money to subsidise it. Oh now you can open but you must do this. Oh now you must do this but only in this area. Now you must do this. Now you must close. Now you can open again but you must do this this and this but no one is going to explain what that means in practice as you're on your own but we're still going to fine you anyway (and publicly shame you) if we want.

This whole discussion has been reduced down to a few selfish wankers who can't just drink some cans at home and not that hospitality is a fooking huge industry (3rd largest I believe, though that might just be jobs) which supports millions and millions of jobs and livelihoods. And now we're turning on them using the language of the government when in reality its just normal people trying to navigate their way through a pandemic with their job and business intact whilst being left largely to fend for themselves and all the time being strapped into an ever tightening straight-jacket.

Frankly, that spoons serving drinks after meals, and allowing the poster to buy three pints with a burger, should be closed down for a month & issued with a £10k fine.

It was always going to happen because it was a stupid rule. Why would anyone intentionally sabotage their own business? Why would anyone want to be so utterly confrontational with their customers over stupid, non-sensical and totally unenforceable rules?

Yeah there are some twats out there. The pubs who don't do food opening anyway and the ones that don't observe the clear rules of table service etc. By and large though its just normal people trying to get through a terrible terrible year with something left intact.

Can't survive if stay closed. Can't survive if you follow the rules exactly (if if it was possible to understand and implement them which its not). Get shamed and blamed for the pandemic if you take the only sensible option of arbitrarily applying the rules as best you can. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Its a shame I need to keep reiterating this but I know I'll just be accused of being a selfish wanker who can't drink cans at home but for the record I have not been inside a pub (except to use the toilet) since early February.

We're turning on each other and this of course is by design.

 

[elbows]

Its been a constant tactic throughout this and we've decried it when this disgusting government have used it time and time again against the general populace, why should we support that tactic now?

Its not a tactic the government have ended up using anything like as much as people claimed would happen. Partly because they are conscious of the warnings they've had from behavioural experts about how to frame the pandemic, how they should not resort to blame, and should instead be encouraging people and continually making noises about how everyone has done their bit and risen to the challenge.

The main exceptions that spring to mind are that when very large failings have happened with test & trace, the likes of Hancock have sometimes sought to blame problems on the demand side of things, and thus the public. This is disgusting shit that is rightly condemned, but I can't think of all that many other examples of this kind.

We're turning on each other and this of course is by design.

Bollocks.

 

[StoneRoad]

Its not a tactic the government have ended up using anything like as much as people claimed would happen. Partly because they are conscious of the warnings they've had from behavioural experts about how to frame the pandemic, how they should not resort to blame, and should instead be encouraging people and continually making noises about how everyone has done their bit and risen to the challenge.

The main exceptions that spring to mind are that when very large failings have happened with test & trace, the likes of Hancock have sometimes sought to blame problems on the demand side of things, and thus the public. This is disgusting shit that is rightly condemned, but I can't think of all that many other examples of this kind.



Bollocks.

Hope I live long enough to be able to read the relevant cabinet minutes ... assuming those are actually accurate and a true record, of course !

 

[Teaboy]

Bollocks.

Oh right, all these comments must just be a mirage then.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree otherwise we'll end up doing it again.

 

[Chilli.s]

The thing with pubs is that they are kinda fucked already, the economics don't make a lot of sense. what with the brewery/landlords squeezing them for rent and tying them to stock contracts. Then the government has always treated booze as the go to tax and run it up as one of their revenue raisers.

 

[cupid_stunt]

They mentioned spoons were serving drinks after people had eaten, and seemed happy about that, despite it clearly being against the law.

Actually this isn't true.

Yes it is, alcohol can only be served with a meal, people can play around with how they define a meal, but it certainly doesn't allow alcohol to be served after a meal is finished.

Why would anyone want to be so utterly confrontational with their customers over stupid, non-sensical and totally unenforceable rules

It's not a nonsensical rule, it makes perfect sense. Likewise it's not unenforceable, and easier to enforce than dealing with, for example, out of control drunks. Licensees have all sorts of responsibilities, otherwise they risk fines or losing their licences, in this case a £10k fine & possible closure, which has happened in some cases, but needs to happen more.

I do agree that there should be more support for the industry.

 

[elbows]

A brief history of such fears, just off the top of my head so very far from perfect and complete:

They will blame us when lockdown 1 doesn't work.
Well, lockdown 1 worked, and they were going for a certain tone of messaging, so that didnt stand a chance of happening.

They will blame us for lockdown fatigue.
Well, the media got lockdown fatigue first and encouraged it, and then the Cummings thing blew up, drawing attention to shit elite behaviours and attitudes and who hasn't been doing the right thing in the pandemic, with a special focus on those who had a position of responsibility in the pandemic response.

They will blame us for a resurgence after summer relaxations / blame us for local lockdowns.
Employment and living conditions got a lot of the blame in Leicester.
Eat out to Help Out got a lot of blame for the national resurgence.
The failure of test & trace got a lot of the blame.
The government resorted to comparing whats happened here to whats happened in European countries, creating a sense of how it was inevitable, rather than blaming the public.

Probably the most successful blame game in terms of the public turning on each other was along tired, cliched generation gap lines. Lots of focus on the behaviour of young people. But even in this area, the governments agenda and plans for keeping education going ended up firmly in the frame.

Other factors such as the clear links between deprivation and high rates of virus, and links between occupation and risk of infection, and ethnicity and risk of infection, have acted as a brake on attempts to tell a shit story of pubic non-compliance.

Also the shitty right wing garbage press like the Daily Mail were, in late summer, far more interested in sentiments such as 'you've had your cheap meal, now get back to work!' and the desire to pressure people into behaving more normally. The back to work agenda required encouraging people to be irresponsible, and this got in the way of the sort of pandemic blame narrative we are discussing, somewhat incompatible agendas so they had to pick one, and they favoured the pro-business, throw away your fears one.

The likes of Johnson will occasionally make reference to how we got too relaxed in the summer, let our guard down etc. But he hasn't gone for this angle big time because again Im sure he is well aware that he was the one encouraging people to relax during the summer phase, including ill-considered language about how he wanted to see bustle.

 

[elbows]

Oh right, all these comments must just be a mirage then.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree otherwise we'll end up doing it again.

My bollocks moment was in regards that us turning on each other was by design. No, its just an inevitable consequence of the agenda to open up more hospitality at this stage than it is sensible to do. And my own outbursts at people whose pandemic views I consider ignorant and dangerous are entirely my own and have been in place for many years before this pandemic got started, I didnt need to take any cues from the Johnson regime on that.

 

[killer b]

Oh right, all these comments must just be a mirage then.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree otherwise we'll end up doing it again.

FWIW I think the amount of turning on each other that's going on atm is well down from the levels it was earlier on in the pandemic. Here and elsewhere I'm noticing people are much less likely to be wanking on about people not sticking to the rules etc being responsible for infections - I haven't seen any polling recently on this specific topic, but I bet it's nothing like what it was in the spring.

 

[chilango]

Yeah. I suspect (with no evidence other than limited observations) there's less blame being slung around because more people are "bending" the rules now.

 

[elbows]

Yeah. I suspect (with no evidence other than limited observations) there's less blame being slung around because more people are "bending" the rules now.

Exactly the situation where I feel like slinging more blame around, not less.

Not that I have no sympathy. People are probably well used to trying to survive and retain some tiny, temporary sense of control and justice by bending rules. Its a national sport, like being hyper vigilant in regards spotting hypocrisy and double-standards, which are never hard to find due to the joke that is labelled 'British sense of fair play'. Love of a rigged game more like, love of tiny victories against the man and arbitrary rules.

 

[Badgers]

Beans on toast is not substantial meal FFS

Four slices of toast with a can of beans would do me

 

[killer b]

Yeah. I suspect (with no evidence other than limited observations) there's less blame being slung around because more people are "bending" the rules now.

That's definitely part of it, for sure. But I think even many people who are remaining vigilant probably have a more sympathetic view now too - we're all very tired.

 

[Teaboy]

Yes it is, alcohol can only be served with a meal, people can play around with how they define a meal, but it certainly doesn't allow alcohol to be served after a meal is finished.

OK. Please define when a meal is finished and who is to decide that? Is it OK if you graze on a bowl of chips all night? If not is Tapas not OK? Is it Ok to leave a hour or so between each course? All this shit is impossible to define which is why they have not tried to. The moment they did they got into a right mess with Scotch Eggs (horrible food by the way, I'd support imposition of fines and forced closures for any place that served them). I've even got a Ukrainian mate who prefers his food to be almost cold before eating it. He will happily sit there and pick at it all night.

Trying to legislate for how much people eat and in what way and what speed is impossible.

It's not a nonsensical rule, it makes perfect sense. Likewise it's not unenforceable, and easier to enforce than dealing with, for example, out of control drunks. Licensees have all sorts of responsibilities, otherwise they risk fines or losing their licences, in this case a £10k fine & possible closure, which has happened in some cases, but needs to happen more.

It is non-sensical because it doesn't pass any test a rule should pass. Where people have been fined is for egregious flouting of clearly defined rules, these are the twats I referred to and I'm happy for them to face the consequences. Does anyone think we're really going to see a court case where people are arguing over what constitutes a meal and what is an acceptable time for it to be eaten in? In fairness it would be fucking hilarious.

I do agree that there should be more support for the industry.

Yeah look, I don't want to be having a go at people and I understand the anger, frustration and sometimes even fear but I have friends who work in hospitality and they are decent people just trying to get through this.

I don't have access to or the knowledge to understand all the science behind it (I have enough knowledge to know what I don't know) but if it really is as bad as it would appear then hospitality should be shut. If that is to happen we need to understand what that means in terms of massive job losses, destruction of livelihoods and generational poverty. The stakes really are that high and we're already seeing it in retail.

If we don't accept that then clearly there are only two options left: compromise and balance or massive bail-out time and everything that involves for the future of the country. The government have opted for balance and this is what it looks like. Personally I think the last option would be best but I'm under no illusions what that means for the future and future generations.

One last thing (I know). This is just hospitality and there are loads of industries out there who have been hammered and are employing similar tactics. The government say all foreign travel should be avoided unless its essential yet I'm getting bombarded by emails from travel companies about winter getaways and ski trips. I'm not getting on any flights but I understand why they are doing it.

 

[SpookyFrank]

FWIW I think the amount of turning on each other that's going on atm is well down from the levels it was earlier on in the pandemic. Here and elsewhere I'm noticing people are much less likely to be wanking on about people not sticking to the rules etc being responsible for infections - I haven't seen any polling recently on this specific topic, but I bet it's nothing like what it was in the spring.

I have formed a similar impression but that could just be result of my having put one particular u75 poster on ignore back in May.

Realistically if you'd not managed to make some kind of peace with the fact that X% of the population will ignore whatever rules entirely and Y% will make some dodgy decisions or have some blind spots then you'd have gone mad with rage by now. The intransigence, selfishness and daftness of humans is of necessity baked into the problem of how do we protect as many humans as possible. They're part of the price we pay for being the kind of species that can actually invent and implement solutions to a potentially existential threat on a timescale of less than a year.

Still though, if you're a vaper who deliberately blows large, clearly visible plumes of pulmonary emissions around in public spaces you share with many people who are likely to be anxious enough as it is then I hope rats eat your balls. And don't drive around with that fucking thing clenched in your paw like that, you can (or really should be able to) survive without it for ten fucking minutes.

 

[wtfftw]

Beans on toast is not substantial meal FFS

Four slices of toast with a can of beans would do me

Two slices and a tin is easily 500kcal, then add butter and cheese. That's definitely a substantial meal. .

 

[elbows]

FWIW I think the amount of turning on each other that's going on atm is well down from the levels it was earlier on in the pandemic. Here and elsewhere I'm noticing people are much less likely to be wanking on about people not sticking to the rules etc being responsible for infections - I haven't seen any polling recently on this specific topic, but I bet it's nothing like what it was in the spring.

I think thats part of how societies come to terms with, communicate and reinforce rules and values. So when the rules change and restrictions are brand new, when the behavioural changes required are still fresh, I expect to hear far more noise about non-compliance and what the right thing to do really is.

Really simple visuals seem to be another constant factor. Pictures of crowded beaches, parks, streets outside pubs etc were a sure-fire way to get people going. And a similar story in the period where the government were trying to avoid an initial lockdown, except that time the anger and concern generated by images of mass gathering at racecourses, marathons and football matches was directed largely at the government for not having shutdown such things earlier. When there are less opportunities to see such gatherings, eg because the weather sucks, then there is less potential for loud complaining about these things.

The story of masks has also evolved quite a lot over time. Again it was not surprising that a lot of the complaints about non-compliance with mask wearing came in the early days of masks for the public, when it was a new rule and people were still coming to terms with it. But now that mask wearing has been normalised, I would expect people to be as annoyed as ever when they end up in a situation where someone who should be wearing a mask isn't.

Personally I cannot really bring myself to moan at people for going to the pub if thats what the rules in their area currently allow. I will moan about the people who set those rules, although I will also end up moaning at those that try to justify their pub visits in a way that is not compatible with the realities of virus transmission. I do not recommend visiting pubs and restaurants this winter. When people ignore this recommendation, I do not consider them public enemy number 1, but I do frequently feel the need to talk about the issues.

 

[killer b]

Two slices and a tin is easily 500kcal, then add butter and cheese. That's definitely a substantial meal. .

Some of the guidance is clearly going to be built around whether the substantial meal is something a landlord could serve for pence to allow them to sell beer, rather than the number of calories in it.

 

[Red Cat]

FWIW I think the amount of turning on each other that's going on atm is well down from the levels it was earlier on in the pandemic. Here and elsewhere I'm noticing people are much less likely to be wanking on about people not sticking to the rules etc being responsible for infections - I haven't seen any polling recently on this specific topic, but I bet it's nothing like what it was in the spring.

I think people are less frightened than they were in the Spring.

 

[killer b]

I think people are less frightened than they were in the Spring.

yep, although I can't see any real reason why they should be (other than fatigue).

 

[Teaboy]

I think people are less frightened than they were in the Spring.

Absolutely. The numbers speak for themselves and its reflecting in peoples behaviour as well as lockdown fatigue etc.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I think people are less frightened than they were in the Spring.

I hope this is true. I'm sure (entirely legitimate) feelings of powerlessness and dread have been a factor behind all sorts of unhelpful stuff, from ignoring restrictions to following the 'this isn't true because I don't want it to be' line of thinking down the conspiraloon rabbit hole.

 

[Teaboy]

yep, although I can't see any real reason why they should be (other than fatigue).

I'd say there were many unknowns around Spring about how in danger we all were. The data now is pretty stark on risk of death and I think we all know this. The young knew this first and that is spreading to older generations as well.

Of course we don't assess the risk of things like long covid because as humans we're not great at assessing that sort of risk. I just think its inherent for us to consider risk to ourselves over risk to others. I still hear it in the language friends use all the time. I'm an outlier in people I know in how seriously I've taken it and this is amongst people who have good qualifications in Biochemistry and the like and jobs in pharma.

I think its quite normal now if you're fortunate enough to be young and healthy enough to see covid as not your problem.

 

[Lord Camomile]

I think its quite normal now if you're fortunate enough to be young and healthy enough to see covid as not your problem.

Yup, sadly.

Although, even people like my parents (69 and 75, the latter with various health conditions) are saying they're "willing to take the risk", which I just feel again is them just not genuinely coming to terms with what the risk is. I don't know, maybe I'm doing them a disservice there.

But there is definitely a general theme of "I'm willing to risk myself" rather than talking about the risk to society at large. The death figures are just numbers

 

[IC3D]

Table service, small dishes all evening, not too crowded.
It's exactly how I want pubs to be.

 

[elbows]

yep, although I can't see any real reason why they should be (other than fatigue).

The initial shock wore off. I'd have to go back to check exactly when this happened but from memory I think it was some time in May, not long before the Cummings revelations. I felt it too, even though I doubt I experienced quite the same level of shock in the first place as a result of my pre-existing pandemic vigilance.

There was also a weird-feeling but understandable anti-climax aspect, as a result of actually locking down just in time to prevent hospital collapse (although thats not the whole story, since that was also achieved by having crap hospital admission standards and encouraging people to die at home). People working in hospitals often felt that weird anti-climax for a time in April, there was all the hype and adrenaline and mental preparation for the massive surge and battle, but depending on where in the country your hospital was, the magnitude of what was actually faced did not always live up to those expectations.

 

[Cloo]

I see track and trace has finally realised that separate calls to a household for each child might be part of the reason for their useless contact rate HuffPost is now a part of Verizon Media

 

[frogwoman]

I think its quite normal now if you're fortunate enough to be young and healthy enough to see covid as not your problem.

Not sure about this tbh, people my age seem to give more of a shit than older people. And having had covid I'm terrified of getting it again. My sister tested positive in October and still hasn't got her sense of smell back.

I don't think it is seeing it as not your problem, the government is so shit so people are just using their judgement, with some people interpreting it much more loosely than others. The amount of people thinking it's just the flu or whatever is actually really low.

 

[killer b]

The initial shock wore off. I'd have to go back to check exactly when this happened but from memory I think it was some time in May, not long before the Cummings revelations. I felt it too, even though I doubt I experienced quite the same level of shock in the first place as a result of my pre-existing pandemic vigilance.

There was also a weird-feeling but understandable anti-climax aspect, as a result of actually locking down just in time to prevent hospital collapse (although thats not the whole story, since that was also achieved by having crap hospital admission standards and encouraging people to die at home). People working in hospitals often felt that weird anti-climax for a time in April, there was all the hype and adrenaline and mental preparation for the massive surge and battle, but depending on where in the country your hospital was, the magnitude of what was actually faced did not always live up to those expectations.

I guess that's fair - I think I said last month that in the first wave, I didn't know anyone personally who'd even had it (other than those who self diagnosed) let alone who'd been seriously ill - and I imagine that will have been the same for many people in lesser-affected areas. That personal experience of nothing really happening must be a pretty powerful thing for public health authorities to overcome... and of course the longer it goes on, and the damage people can directly observe the various restrictions doing to their communities... then it's understandable people's priorities changing.

 

[frogwoman]

I'd add btw that yeah pubs are massively important and I can't wait for them to open up again but plenty of people my age and younger don't do the bulk of their socialising in pubs (not surprisingly given the prices half the time) plenty of people can't go in pubs because of mental health and addiction issues either tbh and saying they are the epicentre of the country or whatever is kinda stretching the point a bit. Note that this doesn't mean that they shouldn't receive financial support or should be boycotted or any of that