Agree with you on this.
FFS Where did I say itās not worthwhile? Itās not even implied by that statement. But yes they will dieā¦ but The point is about context.
ALL life is worthwhileā¦ so why are we now doing so much to save folks who are old, many with respiratory diseases, when we never have a fuck before? Or about those 1000s of kids who die every day?
The point is we donāt give a shit until it on our doorstepā¦ and even then itās politicised and media frenzied to make it so critical, yet where are these same people when it comes to reporting the deaths of those kids?
Why is it not in the news every day that we have 1500 over 70s that die each week from respiratory tract infections?
In your statement you speculate that when we look back over the last 12 months many of these people will have died anyway, as if we are fussing over something trivial. This is what iām taking umbrage with. Just this, not any other statements youāve made.
Because this is something we donāt have a treatment for. Itās estimated that between 300-600k people die per year globally from influenza, and we have a vaccine for that.
If we didnāt give antibiotics and active treatment that 1500 per week you state would be a lot higher. Same with the flu jab, hard to quantify how many lives that saves every year.
I have a half jar of marmalade in the fridge. Phew.
Make sure you have a hat to put them under. I love marmalade, the sharper and thicker-cut the better, but I donāt buy it too often owing to my ability to use half a jar on two slices of toast.
2 Likes
Iām kind of agreeing with both MAP and Gavstar on this thread. Words matter. Thatās the thing. Yes, people die all the time. No, that doesnāt mean we should trivialise any death. Iām pretty sure you are both coming from the ārightā place. x
11 Likes
Ok, I can see how this can be misinterpreted in that way quite easily, but it is actually a truism when you look at it dispassionately. If we take the normal emotional response out of the picture and look at the cold hard statistics, my point is that when you compare the much more terrible set of statistics of those daily unnecessary deaths, why do we as humans only appear to act or care with the kind of money and sophisticated coordination ( Boris fuckwittage excepted) when its impacting on people or peoples that we see as important contributors to our global economic well being? Whatās worse is those daily deaths are PREVENTABLE in many cases, vaccination, clean water, sanitation and nutritionā¦
My point is that if we ācareā, why is it so selective, and I use the statistics to illustrate the inequality of our ācompassionā, not to suggest our old or vulnerable are not deserving of it.
Hope that clarifies it a bit?
But where is that call for the rights to LIVE, LIVE, LIVE! When there is disease, epidemics, hunger, etc that does not effect us in our safe middle England or western economically rich little islands?
Itās great sentiment, yet seems Inconsistently applied and that is my point.
So this is hour most important future trading partners behave in times of troubleā¦ glad to knowā¦
America First
He has never said otherwise
And he will hoover up votes as a result
1 Like
Itās a battle against an enemy, we will defeat this virus!
The same as the language used about the EU - negotiations were always glorious battles to be won through belief, British pluck and a blitz spirit.
In reality itās just shallow fighting talk designed to create a wartime resolve that appeals to simpletons - because strong leaders who defeat enemies or sink the Belgrano, they win votes.
Everything said at the central podium each day is about winning minds, and votes - itās carefully crafted PR - the sensible stuff comes from the podiums either side.
So we will endure repeated messages about putting an arm around business (untrue), working with all of our international partners (untrue), unprecedented investment (mmmm), how everyone has the best PPE (untrue) the UK leading the world in every field (untrue), a 4000-bed hospital built in nine days (untrue), and all of these little war phrases scattered through sentences to make it sound like strong decisive Churchillian leadership.
Which it clearly isnāt.
10 Likes
3 Likes
I hear calls for wealthy individuals to donate some of their wealth to the NHS.
Why are people donating to the NHS?
Itās not a fucking charity. Itās a publicly run service.
If the donations are needed then something is wrong.
6 Likes
1 Like
We now await Politicians Bankers & NGS Fat Cats response.
England contracted players volunteer salary reductions https://es.pn/2R6XTf8
via ESPNCricinfo app http://es.pn/ciapp
Nonsense. Like schools, no matter how well funded (I am not saying either are, BTW), large donations by wealthy individuals or businesses can always be used to improve things. Needed or not, always some area to invest in
Sorry, @Bucks but youāre wrong.
And that you wrote that tells me weāll never agree.
If this money is needed it should come from the state.
If this money isnāt needed, it should go to those that truly need the help at the moment. There are plenty and there will be more.
3 Likes