Your views on how the Tories have handled Coronavirus.

[An Ankoù]

I was in the ADF in Operation Slipper in Afghanistan, not one complaint did I hear from any of my comrades against George Bush, even though it was in everyone's mind we shouldn't have been there. We went in did our duty and not once did I hear a word said against the reason we were there.

I had resolved to shut up and leave "enough said", but you make my point for me so well that a word of thanks is needed. When you were in Afrghanistan, did you have the proper equipment? Was your kit appropriate to the terrain? Did your weapons work or were you left to do your "duty" without a care for your safety? If the latter, would you not expect those who voted for the Government that sent you there to put up an outcry?
Doctors and nurses are also on the front line. They are no less brave and in no less danger than you and your comrades were. There are all "doing their duty" in spite of the fact that it's in all their minds that they shouldn't be there risking themselves, and their families when they go home. And so, we, the people who elect governments, make an outcry when these brave souls are not given the proper tools to do the job. When their safety and wellbeing isn't top priority. Yes, it's the quality of a good soldier, wherever the battle may be, to do what is required of him or her without demur. It is the duty of those on whose behalf the soldiers fight to do what they can to make sure they actually have a "fighting chance".
I thank you for making this point so nicely and I expand on it simply to show that I have fully understood.

A quick googling of "vietnamese beer" comes up with a description which includes "Many people also prefer the taste of imported or international brands like Heineken, Tiger, Biere Larue, Budweiser, and Sapporo" so I guess it's not that good.

 

[Robhardy]

If they had known it was coming i would agree but they didn't, if they has stockpiled millions of pounds worth of PPE just in case we had a pandemic in the future they would have been slaughtered by the same people doing it now because they didn't.

They had a exercise in 2015, this highlighted that the NHS would not cope. That they did not have enough ventilators.

This exercise assumed we had a vaccine.

The report was never published or acted on.

We were warned about SARs and Ebola but fortunately they were not as contagious as covid 19 and so did not spread due in part to measures to contain them

Currently people are coming into this country from Italy, USA and China and not been checked

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Someone posted earlier in the thread what should they have done, its easy to slag them off for what they haven't done so lets hear it from the forum members who have been critical.

Should they have -

Locked the country down (including all schools) as soon as the pandemic started and only allowed essential movement. (including no exercising)

Stockpiled millions of pounds of PPE and ventilators just in case this happened, where would the money have come from the NHS budget certainly wouldn't have stood it.

Closed all airports and stopped all movement between countries as soon as they were aware there was a problem..

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Chippy
Yes to all.

 

[An Ankoù]

Someone posted earlier in the thread what should they have done, its easy to slag them off for what they haven't done so lets hear it from the forum members who have been critical.

Should they have -

Locked the country down (including all schools) as soon as the pandemic started and only allowed essential movement. (including no exercising)

Stockpiled millions of pounds of PPE and ventilators just in case this happened where would the money come from the NHS budget certainly wouldn't stand it.

Closed all airports and stopped all movement between countries.

Good post.
It's easy to say what should have happened and we can always be right with the gift of hind sight. There's no guaranteeing any other government would have reacted any better to this crisis. I may have let it slip, here and there, that my sympathies don't lean towards Conservative thinking, but that's a massive understatement in the context of the current Government. Would a Labour win with Jeremy at the helm have reacted better? I've no reason to think so. If the Lib Dems had got in, it would have been entirely on a "remain" mandate and they would be even less prepared for this. To answer your questions: we still haven't locked down the country. Those that have, allow for some exercise. I told my son to get his kids out of school nearly a fortnight before the "lockdown" came in and he already had. It's becoming increasingly clear that a major epidemic was expected any time and in the face of this, PPE continued to be run down as a matter of Gov't policy, not NHS policy. There's no reason why this couldn't have been ring-fenced, but, it's easy to say that with the benefit of hindsight. I just think this was one of the more reckless aspects of "austerity". Finally, stopping all movement. Yes and No; there were Brits abroad to be repatriated and foreigners in the UK wanting to go home. New Zealand's policy has been effective and sensible in that anybody entering the country goes into quarantine. I think their death count is 4.
All this is water under the bridge. It's happened. Nothing can be done to change it. The question is what are we doing now? Is it everything we could be doing? Could we be doing better? Are lives being needlessly lost? I think everybody knows my views on those questions.

 

[Hoppyland]

If they had known it was coming i would agree but they didn't, if they has stockpiled millions of pounds worth of PPE just in case we had a pandemic in the future they would have been slaughtered by the same people doing it now because they didn't.

This in the Guardian today:
UK government stockpiles containing protective equipment for healthcare workers in the event of a pandemic fell in value by almost 40% over the past six years, the Guardian has found. Analysis of official financial data suggests £325m was wiped off the value of the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) emergency stockpile, reducing it from £831m in 2013 under the Conservative-led coalition government to £506m by March last year.

It looks as though it wasn't so much a case of failing to stockpile, more of getting rid or failing to maintain what we had.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

The question is what are we doing now? Is it everything we could be doing? Could we be doing better? Are lives being needlessly lost? I think everybody knows my views on those questions.

They need to get PPE into nursing homes as well as the NHS which is all we seem to hear about this is happening but needs to be done quicker but with Trump saying he wants to buy as much as he can and basically screw the rest of the world i don't think this will happen as quick as it needs to.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

It looks as though it wasn't so much a case of failing to stockpile, more of getting rid or failing to maintain what we had.

There is only so much money in the pot do you carry on stockpiling something that may not be used for years or spend the money on things needed today, remember there is no magic money tree as Mrs May told us.

 

[Buffers brewery]

Just had a little read of this thread. Two things occur to me.
1. Hind sight is a wonderful thing.
2. Is everybody, yes everybody, not just the wealthy, ready and willing to pay more tax?

 

[MyQul]

2. Is everybody, yes everybody, not just the wealthy, ready and willing to pay more tax?

Well they better be, after the amount sunak has spent (or said he will spend) to bail out the workers

 

[An Ankoù]

Just had a little read of this thread. Two things occur to me.
1. Hind sight is a wonderful thing.
2. Is everybody, yes everybody, not just the wealthy, ready and willing to pay more tax?

Q2 hits the nail on the head. If it can be seen to be collected fairly and proportionately, then I think many would. But that'll go against the grain for a lot of the wealthy,

 

[Buffers brewery]

Q2 hits the nail on the head. If it can be seen to be collected fairly and proportionately, then I think many would. But that'll go against the grain for a lot of the wealthy,

Is it true that 50% of income tax is paid by top 5% of earners? If that’s true I think the rub will be increasing tax on lower income earners. But may be necessary. And perhaps NI needs to be increased and ring-fenced for the NHS?

 

[MyQul]

Is it true that 50% of income tax is paid by top 5% of earners? If that’s true I think the rub will be increasing tax on lower income earners. But may be necessary. And perhaps NI needs to be increased and ring-fenced for the NHS?

I dont know whether that's true but huge swathes of the population dont pay any income tax because single persons income tax rate is so high (£12,500 pa) and these huges swathes dont earn enough to pay anything. It's the JAMS (just about managing) who will be clobbered

 

[An Ankoù]

Is it true that 50% of income tax is paid by top 5% of earners? If that’s true I think the rub will be increasing tax on lower income earners. But may be necessary. And perhaps NI needs to be increased and ring-fenced for the NHS?

In truth, I don't know. But while there are a number of very rich salting away their wealth in offshore tax havens and a number of corporations who are not paying their due, then the ordinary drinker in the Nag's Head isn't going to be inclined to dig into his pocket to bail those boys out. The whole system has got to become completely transparent and tax-dodgers have got to be recognised for the pariah they truly are.
IMHO

 

[Session]

2. Is everybody, yes everybody, not just the wealthy, ready and willing to pay more tax?

The wealthy paying tax would be a great start.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

2. Is everybody, yes everybody, not just the wealthy, ready and willing to pay more tax?

I am not on a big wage but would be happy to give a little more in tax if there was a guarantee it was going to the places where it was most needed.

 

[Buffers brewery]

The wealthy paying tax would be a great start.

Who would you include in wealthy?

 

[Session]

Who would you include in wealthy?

The most important, and most difficult, question! Whilst I’d love to say ‘anyone who earns more than me’, I think a reasonable answer is probably anyone who earns more than £200k (including share packages/bonuses etc), and corporations such as Amazon who pay next to zero. I imagine by increasing tax on a small minority you could buy a fair few ventilators...

 

[An Ankoù]

Who would you include in wealthy?

It's the wrong question, BB. Working hard and acquiring wealth is a good thing ( see Ferengi laws of aquisition) provided we all pitch in proportionately. My lad is in mid-career, but with three kids and a new mortgage, has to be careful. I'm retired, no mortgage, no kids, no worries. Not a great, but not a **** pension, only just coming into the tax bracket. For the first time in my life I get more than I can spend, so who's wealthy?

 

[MyQul]

I am not on a big wage but would be happy to give a little more in tax if there was a guarantee it was going to the places where it was most needed.

It never does though. A few days ago tesum was given a £600 million loan bailout but then promptly paid out £650 million to shareholders