Lots to agree with here. It is a desperate situation for a vast number of people.
(Not me, obviously, because I'm a "full salary ******" with no connection to the real world.)
Some things to disagree/debate with.
During each lockdown cases slowed and reversed.
Yes, there were areas of growth, at least for a while, and, yes, these are in the areas /sectors that were more open. That only reinforces the conclusion that lockdowns are very effective and how important they were. They have even contained the Kent, SA and Brazilian variants, despite them being more transmissible.
Having lots of deaths was fairly inevitable - having this many most certainly was not. I've read on here that lockdowns only delay covid deaths: clearly untrue as we see the vaccination programme take effect. Taking a hit to the economy was inevitable. Taking this much of a hit most certainly was not.
At least twice we have reopened to soon and gone back to worse than square one with all the implications for the economy, jobs, mental health and so on. The governess cautious approach this time is correct and a support them in that, in the face of opposition from the usual know-nothing know-it-alls making a racket on their back benches. I reject the idea that the economy and deaths are some sort of balance to be struck. Getting virus levels down is good for both, and the sooner the better.
It may have been reversing, but it reversed in the summer where we got deaths down to zero, we came out of lockdown and it grew again. It would have been a vicious circle had it not been for the vaccines, particularly given we’ve just gone through winter, which means we’d have been using the same timelines as right now from an exit perspective, unless we planned on doing a summer repeat.
My issue isn’t necessarily with what we’ve ended up doing to save lives, but very much about people’s attitudes to the economy (not you by the way). It’s possible to have the opinion that lockdown was a necessity, whilst still appreciating that this is an utterly horrendous for people under 40.
They’ve been thrown into complete uncertainty when it comes to job security, when they were never really at risk of the disease. The triple whammy will be when the thousands eventually find a job, they’ll have their income tax hiked up to the point where they questioned why they wanted a job in the first place.
These are genuine fears and in many cases, realities, but they were met with statements like “Covidiots” or “you happy for many to die for you to go for a pint” when the debate was made. People like that tosser Piers Morgan have only shown compassion for one set of people because he’s so out of touch with reality and it doesn’t impact him or his villa.
The fact that Boris hasn’t once used one of his many briefings to acknowledge the situation for so many millions is frankly despicable.
On your point around a cautious reopening - I don’t really understand the science behind it. If the vaccine is reducing hospitalization and deaths by up to 95% on a group that have already been vaccinated with admissions plummeting, I’m not sure what scientific evidence there would be that backs hospitality and none essential shops needing to wait months for reopening? The transmission rate was already incredibly low in these sectors, so this just feels like an unnecessary kick in the teeth.
And for those who think I’m just after a pint in the sun, it isn’t about that. I can take or leave that. I work in the umbrella that has been hit hardest and restructures are happening every 6 months. People might think “let’s give it 3 months to be sure”, but that could be the difference between thousands keeping their job and thousands losing it.