Return to normality - a double edged sword?

How would you prefer the country to be once the crisis is entirely over?

  • Keep the lockdown regulations

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Return entirely to normality, as it was in 2019

    Votes: 66 45.5%
  • Return to normality, but keeping some of the elements such as work-from-home

    Votes: 70 48.3%
  • Keep many of the lockdown rules but remove some of the more restrictive aspects

    Votes: 2 1.4%
  • Remove all of the lockdown rules but societal changes in behavior which make life closer to lockdown

    Votes: 6 4.1%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    145

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
2,701
Anybody who claims you can make yourself indispensable by just turning up is living in cloud cuckoo land.
I think the jist of it was, employers working out that if you can work at home with no issues, then they can get someone to do the same in another Country for a lot less money ! so by making it look as though working from home is not to the same quality of actually going into work !
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ExRes

Established Member
Joined
16 Dec 2012
Messages
2,829
Location
Devon (Ex Sussex)
I find it rather interesting that time after time in normal everyday life we hear 'mental health and wellbeing' being mentioned, I have to ask those that are in favour of mass work from home what they think that is likely to do to individuals mental health and wellbeing, how many people can actually cope with spending day after day in their own company?
 

bramling

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
9,147
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
This is only a problem for jobs that can be done at very efficiently with full time home working. There are other issues around quality and data protection. The vast majority of people currently working from home full time will be back in the office part of the week at some point. My guess would be an average of 3 days in the office and 2 days WFH. That would save employers tremendous amounts on property and give employees more flexibility. Both full time office and full time home working are sub optimal for many jobs.

I voted for normality but with some changes. I understand why people would want a return to 2019 situation but its extremely unlikely. After massive upheaval things rarely return to how they were.
What is to stop people taking a cheeky day at the beach if, for example, the weather is fine?

It’s already endemic that attendance drops during times like school holidays, fine weather, during major sports events, et cetera. There would need to be some serious checks and balances in place to ensure people are doing the working from bit as well as the home bit.

My place has already found that productivity has decreased, and we only have a very small amount of working from home, mainly in certain support functions.
 

SouthEastBuses

On Moderation
Joined
15 Nov 2019
Messages
537
Location
UK & Italy
Eurostar is only really convenient if you're from London or in the immediate vicinity of. It'd be much more convenient for me to drive to Edinburgh Airport and take a flight from there.

Oh, and Eurostar is extortionate.
Very true point, hence why the British government (or whoever it was) should have NEVER cancelled the HS1-HS2 rail link in the first place.

If we want to have more ecologically / environmentally friendly international travel from the rest of the UK (including Scotland) to Mainland Europe, then the only answer to this is to build a link between HS2 and HS1. That way, we can see, for example, Eurostar trains from Glasgow to Brussels, Edinburgh to Paris, Manchester to Rome or Liverpool to Barcelona! Without the need to change in London!

And you're right about the price too. I forgot to say, in order to make sure the Eurostar is effective, we need to slash the Eurostar prices to those of EasyJet/Ryanair flights, and then I'm sure a lot more people will use Eurostar! And should capacity increase so much to the point it puts pressure, then how about Eurostar starts to buy TGV Duplex trainsets (which btw are double decker high speed trains used in France) to add more capacity? Heck, even Shinkansen E1/E4 series would work! (and yes, Japan does have high speed double decker trains!)
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
8,686
Location
St Albans
I want the old normal, exactly as it was. Nothing much wrong with it, and you can make adjustments from that starting point, as opposed to this 'new normal' being pushed mostly by people with some sort of agenda.
Nope, the starting point is where we are now! There's no means of winding the clock back to any previous time. The decline in city centre retail and leisure services is nothing to do with COVOD-19, - it started over a decade ago. With WFH greatly advanced from where it had progressed to before the pandemic, many the declining businesses just accelerated that decline. In 2 years time we will be where we would have been in 2025. The main difference is that the higher rate of redundancies cause by the restrictions will mean that the government has had less time to redeploy the unemployed in new roles and in new industries.
That is not 'agenda' being pushed by some people, it is the most logical way for the economy to be revived. People have had a taster of life without the old drudgery so much of that will fall by the wayside, - even with bribes of cheap meals and calling retail therapy imbibing a citizen's 'duty' from the government
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
2,778
I think the jist of it was, employers working out that if you can work at home with no issues, then they can get someone to do the same in another Country for a lot less money ! so by making it look as though working from home is not to the same quality of actually going into work !
There does seem to be a lot of people who need to see things in very black and white terms. Just because its possible doesn't mean its the most productive or best value for money. Many employers of office based staff are planning a mix.

I would agree with the first bit (where I work, staff seem to want 2 or 3 days at home ideally). The second bit is going to vary though depending on the organisation - in our case (we have looked at it), it'll make little to no difference as one of the main purposes of being in the office will be to see other colleagues, so they'll need to be in on those days as well. We aleady use hotdesking as we have more staff than desks, but that isn't a problem as many of them are out working on site for a lot of the time normally.
I agree it really depends on the nature of the work and could vary right down to the departments within an organisation. There is no need for all of my colleagues to all be in at once. We have been told not to expect to keep our current allocation of desks and to expect some home working permanently.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
2,778
What is to stop people taking a cheeky day at the beach if, for example, the weather is fine?

It’s already endemic that attendance drops during times like school holidays, fine weather, during major sports events, et cetera. There would need to be some serious checks and balances in place to ensure people are doing the working from bit as well as the home bit.

My place has already found that productivity has decreased, and we only have a very small amount of working from home, mainly in certain support functions.
In the vast majority of office jobs you would be found out very quickly if you didn't turn up. For instance if I am not logged into Skype my manager knows either I am having IT problems or I am not working. Many office jobs inherently leave a digital paper trail e.g. entering stuff onto systems. Thats excluding more sophisticated monitoring and the very basic e.g. being expected to reply quickly to urgent emails. I am not surprised full time home working is less productive for your colleagues doing back office work. It doesn't mean full time office working is the most productive option.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
2,701
There does seem to be a lot of people who need to see things in very black and white terms. Just because its possible doesn't mean its the most productive or best value for money. Many employers of office based staff are planning a mix.



I agree it really depends on the nature of the work and could vary right down to the departments within an organisation. There is no need for all of my colleagues to all be in at once. We have been told not to expect to keep our current allocation of desks and to expect some home working permanently.
When you think how many call centres have decanted to other climes, and whilst some could be retained in a smaller office, maybe staff who work for Insurance Companies, and those that deal mainly over the phone / internet may find their job goes abroad ? Almost like saying, manual boxes are fine, and work well, (which some do :) ) but that does not stop them putting them all into an IECC / ROC as it saves a few quid. (OK maybe an extreme comparison)
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
8,244
Location
Yorkshire
I'll certainly not be returning quickly to buying a sandwich every day from the shop near work - although over time I'm sure things might change.
On the flip side I’d love to have the work canteen available again (though we know it’ll be a little while yet) - I’m getting bored of my own sandwiches now (and truth be told, eating in the canteen used to force me away from my desk for 20 minutes whereas now I just stay at the computer)
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
8,244
Location
Yorkshire
I find it rather interesting that time after time in normal everyday life we hear 'mental health and wellbeing' being mentioned, I have to ask those that are in favour of mass work from home what they think that is likely to do to individuals mental health and wellbeing, how many people can actually cope with spending day after day in their own company?
I’ve been relatively fortunate in having had office time throughout the whole affair but it has been progressively stepping up. Don’t mind the odd day WFH but anymore than that and I tend to lose focus. I do feel better this week for having had a fair chunk of time in the office and having a bit more (socially aware) human interaction. Whilst it doesn’t suit everyone, it does me and I (generally) get on well with my colleagues

That being said, I’m getting far too used to lack of traffic and generally quick resulting journeys!
 
Last edited:

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
2,778
When you think how many call centres have decanted to other climes, and whilst some could be retained in a smaller office, maybe staff who work for Insurance Companies, and those that deal mainly over the phone / internet may find their job goes abroad ? Almost like saying, manual boxes are fine, and work well, (which some do :) ) but that does not stop them putting them all into an IECC / ROC as it saves a few quid. (OK maybe an extreme comparison)
Offshoring gets harder the higher the value the work is. Some jobs may go overseas but the low hanging fruit went a long time ago and the trend has been reversed in recent years due to more focus on quality. Jobs that are more cost effective to do overseas already are. The vast majority of employers with office staff working from home are keen to get them back in office at least some of the time. The pandemic has provided the ultimate test of home working and shown its strengths and limitations. The cost of the necessary IT has already been spent and the disruption of altering working practices to allow WFH has already happened. I think we are looking at a future that is mostly the pre Covid work situation but with much larger numbers of people being able to WFH a minority of the time. That outcome would really irratate people can never WFH.
 

BJames

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2018
Messages
682
Social distancing and covid secure measures aren't wrecking the economy.
Long post incoming, sorry - but this makes no sense at all.

The whole point of reducing social distancing from 2 metres to this "1 metre plus" rule was to make some ground in allowing the economy to reopen, because although 2 metres is safer than 1 metre, there are so many parts of the economy that can't survive. Since everyone wants examples and figures, I'll start with this article from the Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/busines...ng-threatens-survival-40000-small-businesses/):

Social distancing rules will make it impossible for 400,000 of Britain’s small businesses to reopen after lockdown, threatening to blow a major hole in the economic recovery.

About half the 5.7m small companies closed at the height of the pandemic and a third are still shut.

Of those, one in five cannot reopen with the two metre rule still in force and even those that can restart operations face major bills. A quarter expect to have to spend more than £1,000 to comply with the guidelines, according to the Federation of Small Businesses.

The group has written to the Chancellor to call for...

[paywall]
Even if this was a huge overestimate and it was nearer to, say, 100,000 small businesses that were not able to reopen, this has a devastating impact on the economy and hundreds of thousands of people's livelihoods. Not to mention the fact that many chains, are threatening or confirming store closures, you can see loads of examples here:


And to summarise, https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ress-close-restaurants-jobs-staff-coronavirus

Pizza Express has become the latest chain to announce it is closing restaurants as the coronavirus pandemic causes a domino effect on Britain’s high streets, claiming 17,000 jobs in eateries and other food outlets in a matter of months.

The company confirmed plans on Tuesday to use a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) – an insolvency process that allows it to close outlets and cut rents – that could result in the closure of as many as 70 of its 449 UK restaurants. The plan could cost as many as 1,100 jobs.

[snip]
Imagine the situation remains exactly the same as it is now and furlough winds up as expected in October. I fear for the state of the economy then, but it seems that this is what it will take for people to realise the true impacts of social distancing and Covid restrictions.


In all fairness a lot of those were in a poor state before Covid 19.
Surely you must accept that Covid-19 is what has pushed them into insolvency though? The suggestion that this would have happened anyway is not untrue if you consider it over a much much longer timescale, and many high street businesses may indeed have gone bust in the next few years. But they're all going bust at the same time because of social distancing, causing mass job losses, and restrictions on their services that have meant they cannot meet their costs with a reduction in customers. Social distancing = less customers UNLESS your business can run completely perfectly online (and even then some custom may not prove transferable) or unless potentially you can keep your business open for significantly extended hours, or extend outside like some restaurants are able to do.

Last but probably the most important example - the entertainment industry. See this: https://www.standard.co.uk/go/londo...h-covid-london-theatre-west-end-a4510241.html - it's long but it's all really important - especially see the bolded part.

London’s theatre crisis rose to new heights of absurdity last week when Andrew Lloyd Webber brilliantly exposed the artistic and commercial bankruptcy of trying to apply social distancing to indoor mainstream theatre. Even the most optimistic theatre practitioners among us came to the conclusion that it is a disaster.



It was all Alice in Wonderland in its ridiculousness: images of distanced patrons dotted around the huge Palladium theatre, members of Public Health England stalking the stalls to check masks covered everyone’s face properly, meanwhile Health Secretary Matt Hancock was saying that masks would not be needed to be worn in cinemas and theatres! Even the expensively imported Korean hygienic fog machine got condemned as unsafe by PHE — the Marx brothers would have difficulty topping that. Andrew is trying his best for the profession he loves, for goodness’ sake.



The Treasury and the Department for Culture Media and Sport have now confirmed they will not even consider the question of whether social distancing can be dispensed with until sometime in November, so the possibility of a proper Panto at Christmas is almost certainly “behind you!” Andrew has said there are Chinese investors trying to snap up our heritage in these precarious times. Rest assured I have no intention of letting any of my West End theatres go East.




With no endgame to this crisis in sight, last week I had to follow through with the awful, distressing downsizing of my organisation to ensure my company’s survival. In early May I warned Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden and the Government that this would be necessary unless we received financial help. Despite the recent announcement of a £1.57 billion rescue fund for the arts, this help still hasn’t materialised. When Covid hit, all my eight theatres were packed with hit shows including some of my own. So as by far the largest independent employer in the West End it is not surprising that as both theatre owner and producer, with no outside investors, I’ve taken a huge financial hit. On top of this, Andrew and I have had to sadly permanently shut down our London and UK touring productions of The Phantom of the Opera, but are determined to bring it back to London in the future.



The theatre has made me a wealthy man but I have already ploughed back most of that wealth into my business, refurbishing my theatres, keeping my shows in tip-top shape, as well as supporting the livelihood of thousands of talented colleagues around the world. With theatres closed indefinitely, I have had to let go all the actors, musicians, stage staff and freelancers that work for me. My loyal production and theatre management staff have been cut by 60 per cent reduced to a dedicated team who will look after these priceless historic buildings so they are ready to ramp up back into production the moment the Government accepts that social distancing, which I have been totally opposed to from the outset, is no longer a requirement.



But even without it, we will need at least four months to remount our productions, rebuild our advance bookings and public confidence and bring our artists back to performance pitch. I’m still hopeful that by Easter next year most of my productions and some of our theatres can reopen, so I can start re-employing most of the staff I’ve had to let go. But we’d need to reopen our box offices in November. If the Government is unable to support this, we’re likely to have to push back our reopening to next summer, causing further devastating losses to both the theatre industry and London’s economy, to which I have already contributed more than £1 billion in tax.



Theatres will endeavour to make attending a show as safe as possible for both audiences and artists, but the successful return of major hit shows and a few of the new ones are the key to bringing back audiences and restoring confidence in the West End. Quite naturally the producers of these shows, myself included, are being very careful about when they think they have the best chance of succeeding because if these shows don’t work and pay their way the outlook will be very bleak indeed. Delfont Mackintosh Theatres have striven at all times to keep our patrons realistically informed about our position and are grateful for the public’s understanding and the majority wish to roll over their bookings to new dates next year.



Many of the new productions booked to open this year are already rescheduled for mid-2021 at the earliest, whatever the Government says about reopening dates. Back in early May I expressed the fear that London and Broadway, the world’s greatest centres of theatre, would be the last places in the world to reopen. Sadly this prophecy is coming true: Broadway is likely to be closed until next summer. Consequently, for the first time ever there are very few new shows waiting in the wings to replace the shows that fail. The creative supply line has been ruptured for at least 18 months. London and New York can’t properly function until theatres reopen.
Written by Cameron Mackintosh, the producer of some of the most famous west end shows including Phantom of the Opera, Hamilton and Les Miserables.

I am genuinely interested to hear which bit of this you disagree with, and will happily read any counter to why social distancing is not damaging all of what I have shown it is.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
2,701
Long post incoming, sorry - but this makes no sense at all.

The whole point of reducing social distancing from 2 metres to this "1 metre plus" rule was to make some ground in allowing the economy to reopen, because although 2 metres is safer than 1 metre, there are so many parts of the economy that can't survive. Since everyone wants examples and figures, I'll start with this article from the Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/busines...ng-threatens-survival-40000-small-businesses/):



Even if this was a huge overestimate and it was nearer to, say, 100,000 small businesses that were not able to reopen, this has a devastating impact on the economy and hundreds of thousands of people's livelihoods. Not to mention the fact that many chains, are threatening or confirming store closures, you can see loads of examples here:


And to summarise, https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ress-close-restaurants-jobs-staff-coronavirus



Imagine the situation remains exactly the same as it is now and furlough winds up as expected in October. I fear for the state of the economy then, but it seems that this is what it will take for people to realise the true impacts of social distancing and Covid restrictions.



Surely you must accept that Covid-19 is what has pushed them into insolvency though? The suggestion that this would have happened anyway is not untrue if you consider it over a much much longer timescale, and many high street businesses may indeed have gone bust in the next few years. But they're all going bust at the same time because of social distancing, causing mass job losses, and restrictions on their services that have meant they cannot meet their costs with a reduction in customers. Social distancing = less customers UNLESS your business can run completely perfectly online (and even then some custom may not prove transferable) or unless potentially you can keep your business open for significantly extended hours, or extend outside like some restaurants are able to do.

Last but probably the most important example - the entertainment industry. See this: https://www.standard.co.uk/go/londo...h-covid-london-theatre-west-end-a4510241.html - it's long but it's all really important - especially see the bolded part.



Written by Cameron Mackintosh, the producer of some of the most famous west end shows including Phantom of the Opera, Hamilton and Les Miserables.

I am genuinely interested to hear which bit of this you disagree with, and will happily read any counter to why social distancing is not damaging all of what I have shown it is.
And as many have said, the Country needs to get back to normal, sooner rather than later, leave it too long, we will up the creek without a paddle, the problem is the UK, and most other Countries followed what Italy did, (and Italy followed China etc) and have now backed themselves into a corner, that they cannot get out of ! The Media / FB / Twitter and the likes, have peddled doom and death if you even look at someone else ! It will be interesting when the real figures come out, if they ever do. Hays Travel . TUI / BA some of the latest to say jobs are going
 

birchesgreen

Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
333
Location
Birmingham
One negative aspect of working from home seems to be dawning on people now - if someone can work at home, what's to stop their work being outsourced to locations offshore where labour is cheaper?
This some sort of meme that's doing the rounds now? Seen this in a few places over the last day or so.

Trying to scare people to go back to their offices, though whether people continue working from home or not is up to the employers.
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
8,686
Location
St Albans
This some sort of meme that's doing the rounds now? Seen this in a few places over the last day or so.

Trying to scare people to go back to their offices, though whether people continue working from home or not is up to the employers.
The elephant in the room is that people shop first for what they 'need', then there is time for what they 'want'. If there is a genuine demand for the 'want', business will provide it. For the last couple of decades, retail business has obsessed in offering people 'experiences' at 'destinations' a thinly veiled disguise for persuading shoppers to part with their money. Now we have experienced living with what is actually necessary and realise how much of the other stuff is just a part of the mechanism to prise more money than we need to part wit. We are of course paying for the additional cost of all this window dressing, - there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Those businesses offering what people need will survive. Those riding on the back of the public's whims will have a much harder time. Johnson's exhortations about 'duty' to spend, (which in some cases would mean descending further into debt), might give their business supporters a cheer, but for many, it will just deepen their plight and dampen any attempts to recover enough to provide the essentials of life.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
5,444
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
The elephant in the room is that people shop first for what they 'need', then there is time for what they 'want'. If there is a genuine demand for the 'want', business will provide it. For the last couple of decades, retail business has obsessed in offering people 'experiences' at 'destinations' a thinly veiled disguise for persuading shoppers to part with their money. Now we have experienced living with what is actually necessary and realise how much of the other stuff is just a part of the mechanism to prise more money than we need to part wit. We are of course paying for the additional cost of all this window dressing, - there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Those businesses offering what people need will survive. Those riding on the back of the public's whims will have a much harder time. Johnson's exhortations about 'duty' to spend, (which in some cases would mean descending further into debt), might give their business supporters a cheer, but for many, it will just deepen their plight and dampen any attempts to recover enough to provide the essentials of life.
Yeah we have been living with just what we need, and many of us have realised just how thoroughly miserable it is. So if you don't mind, some of us will continue to work hard to improve our lives with the wants as well as the needs. And in the process we will help others who provide the wants with their needs.
 

AM9

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
8,686
Location
St Albans
Yeah we have been living with just what we need, and many of us have realised just how thoroughly miserable it is. So if you don't mind, some of us will continue to work hard to improve our lives with the wants as well as the needs. And in the process we will help others who provide the wants with their needs.
Dream on, reality will be here sooner. More seriously, it's foolish to hold onto some overoptimistic vision of getting back to normal like this pandemic never happened. That is a sure route to real depression, not just consuming self-pity.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
5,444
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Dream on, reality will be here sooner. More seriously, it's foolish to hold onto some overoptimistic vision of getting back to normal like this pandemic never happened. That is a sure route to real depression, not just consuming self-pity.
Reality is hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people losing their jobs if we continue with this deluded idea of shutting all but essential services down in an attempt to try and sit out the virus. Not only will we have to support those people losing their jobs, but we will also lose their tax revenue, taxes that we need to pay for the essential services like the NHS. But hey, maybe if we keeping banging those pots...?
 

thejuggler

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2016
Messages
910
Bjames. It isn't a difficult concept to think beyond your belief that lockdown is wrecking the economy, it isn't.

If I break my back and end up a wheelchair for 12 months is it the wheelchair that prevents me leaving the house because I can't get down the back steps? No, its the broken back. Once my back is fixed and the wheelchair is gone I can get back to normal.

The problem is after 8 months our Government still haven't a clue how to fix a 'broken back' in the form of Covid-19 so the Country is still in a 'wheelchair'.
 

philosopher

Member
Joined
23 Sep 2015
Messages
188
The elephant in the room is that people shop first for what they 'need', then there is time for what they 'want'. If there is a genuine demand for the 'want', business will provide it. For the last couple of decades, retail business has obsessed in offering people 'experiences' at 'destinations' a thinly veiled disguise for persuading shoppers to part with their money. Now we have experienced living with what is actually necessary and realise how much of the other stuff is just a part of the mechanism to prise more money than we need to part wit. We are of course paying for the additional cost of all this window dressing, - there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Those businesses offering what people need will survive. Those riding on the back of the public's whims will have a much harder time. Johnson's exhortations about 'duty' to spend, (which in some cases would mean descending further into debt), might give their business supporters a cheer, but for many, it will just deepen their plight and dampen any attempts to recover enough to provide the essentials of life.
The whole capitalist system depends on persuading people to spend on stuff they do not need and perhaps would not otherwise want, hence why there is advertising. Therefore what ever changes occur as a result this, I bet you still get businesses trying to get you to part with their money. The only differences is that it will different businesses, such as online retailers instead of high street retailers trying to get you to part with your money.

Also trying to save is not just about saving the businesses, it is also about trying to save people‘s jobs. Many of those businesses that currently employ a lot of people (retail, hospitality, etc, granted many jobs in these sectors are not well paid) will end up laying off many jobs if they go bust. The new growth industries will likely be online retail and services, which generally employ fewer people, hence there will be fewer jobs all round.
 
Last edited:

jtuk

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
260
The problem is after 8 months our Government still haven't a clue how to fix a 'broken back' in the form of Covid-19 so the Country is still in a 'wheelchair'.
A better analogy is the Government doesn't know how to fix a broken fingernail, and is opting to amputate the arm instead
 

DavidB

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
1,833
Bjames. It isn't a difficult concept to think beyond your belief that lockdown is wrecking the economy, it isn't.

If I break my back and end up a wheelchair for 12 months is it the wheelchair that prevents me leaving the house because I can't get down the back steps? No, its the broken back. Once my back is fixed and the wheelchair is gone I can get back to normal.

The problem is after 8 months our Government still haven't a clue how to fix a 'broken back' in the form of Covid-19 so the Country is still in a 'wheelchair'.
It would perhaps be more accurate to say that the government response to the virus is wrecking the economy, rather than the virus itself, but pretty much all the points raised as still valid (and I don't agree with your point about lockdown - that and associated measures very definitely are doing the damage).

The wheelchair analogy is a good one in that in many cases the doctors would have decided that there is nothing they can do, so regrettable as it is the patient will remain a wheelchair user for the long term and will just have to accept that. We've seen no admission from the government what wiping out this government in a realistic timescale isn't going to happen and that people need to accept that.
 

Joel_F

Member
Joined
28 May 2019
Messages
175
Location
Deepest Darkest Northamptonshire
If we want to have more ecologically / environmentally friendly international travel from the rest of the UK (including Scotland) to Mainland Europe, then the only answer to this is to build a link between HS2 and HS1. That way, we can see, for example, Eurostar trains from Glasgow to Brussels, Edinburgh to Paris, Manchester to Rome or Liverpool to Barcelona! Without the need to change in London!
And we would have to build a second (or third, or fourth) Channel Tunnel to increase capacity?

We're an island, flights are essential for travel to Europe. How about more efficient aircraft?
 

BJames

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2018
Messages
682
Bjames. It isn't a difficult concept to think beyond your belief that lockdown is wrecking the economy, it isn't.

If I break my back and end up a wheelchair for 12 months is it the wheelchair that prevents me leaving the house because I can't get down the back steps? No, its the broken back. Once my back is fixed and the wheelchair is gone I can get back to normal.

The problem is after 8 months our Government still haven't a clue how to fix a 'broken back' in the form of Covid-19 so the Country is still in a 'wheelchair'.
I won't repeat myself again but I don't agree. It is. Otherwise why are we trying to get everyone to "eat out to help out" - we need people to come out of their houses and get spending.

I don't disagree that the government have no clue how to fix this so-called "broken back" but to suggest that lockdown is fine (thus implying that continuing with lockdown will not further damage the economy) is pure fantasy in my opinion.
 

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
1,968
Return to normality as it was in 2019, as soon as possible! As these "social distancing" and "COVID-Secure" measures dragging on for months on end are absolutely wrecking the economy! We can't go on much longer like this.
I want the old normal, exactly as it was. Nothing much wrong with it, and you can make adjustments from that starting point
I'll go along with that too!
Are you really claiming that none of the lockdown measures have in any way been improvements?


How about the fact that there were virtually no cars on the roads for weeks, allowing many less confident cyclists and pedestrians to properly get out, and vastly reducing levels of noise?

How about the extra free time that many people were afforded?

How about the vastly reduced energy consumption and therefore environmental benefits associated with it?

Are these not things you'd want to keep?

I hate most of lockdown, but there are a number of things that I want as they are now, or even as they were several weeks ago.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
49,849
Location
Yorkshire
Are you really claiming that none of the lockdown measures have in any way been improvements?
Unfortunately none of these are really improvements when you look a bit deeper.

How about the fact that there were virtually no cars on the roads for weeks, allowing many less confident cyclists and pedestrians to properly get out, and vastly reducing levels of noise?
The reality is that car usage has increased its market share, at the expense of public transport

The lockdown itself was a one-off short-term event; what we are left with is a massive attack on public transport users.
How about the extra free time that many people were afforded?
Again this is really a nonsense; I know people who are (or were) really struggling mentally because they were denied the right to do the things they enjoy.
How about the vastly reduced energy consumption and therefore environmental benefits associated with it?
That only applies to the lockdown itself; the idea that everyone should be locked down forever is utterly absurd; I don't really know what else to say.

That's not to say some things won't improve, but I see nothing on your list that is actually happening and is actually an improvement. Your list appears to consist of temporary things that applied during the actual lockdown and not any sort of "new normal" at all.

It's rather like saying how great the behaviour at a school is, when you have 15 students attending instead of 700, i.e. completely missing the point.

Sorry to be blunt, but it needed to be said!
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
513
Are you really claiming that none of the lockdown measures have in any way been improvements?


How about the fact that there were virtually no cars on the roads for weeks, allowing many less confident cyclists and pedestrians to properly get out, and vastly reducing levels of noise?

How about the extra free time that many people were afforded?

How about the vastly reduced energy consumption and therefore environmental benefits associated with it?

Are these not things you'd want to keep?

I hate most of lockdown, but there are a number of things that I want as they are now, or even as they were several weeks ago.
All of that was at a cost of what will turn out to be millions of jobs. So I’d like things back as they were.

And while the roads were empty nobody was allowed out anyway, technically, so any benefit was somewhat scuppered. Cycle up to a beauty spot and the police were there to intercept you and tell you you were killing people.
 

bramling

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
9,147
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Are you really claiming that none of the lockdown measures have in any way been improvements?


How about the fact that there were virtually no cars on the roads for weeks, allowing many less confident cyclists and pedestrians to properly get out, and vastly reducing levels of noise?

How about the extra free time that many people were afforded?

How about the vastly reduced energy consumption and therefore environmental benefits associated with it?

Are these not things you'd want to keep?

I hate most of lockdown, but there are a number of things that I want as they are now, or even as they were several weeks ago.
I’d love to return to the empty roads we saw in April, however without finding a way to immobilise a proportion of the population it’s simply not going to happen.

The sooner we return to proper normal the better. Let’s face it the main reason why some people think this is all wonderful is because they’re being paid to sit at home or go out for jollies day after day, at the nation’s very considerable expense. It’s not sustainable, and ultimately it’s not good for anyone’s mental wellbeing.
 

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
1,968
Unfortunately none of these are really improvements when you look a bit deeper.


The reality is that car usage has increased its market share, at the expense of public transport

The lockdown itself was a one-off short-term event; what we are left with is a massive attack on public transport users.

Again this is really a nonsense; I know people who are (or were) really struggling mentally because they were denied the right to do the things they enjoy.

That only applies to the lockdown itself; the idea that everyone should be locked down forever is utterly absurd; I don't really know what else to say.

That's not to say some things won't improve, but I see nothing on your list that is actually happening and is actually an improvement. Your list appears to consist of temporary things that applied during the actual lockdown and not any sort of "new normal" at all.
I believe you've misunderstood me.

I was talking about those very specific benefits. What I meant is that, if there is a way to achieve those things without all the horrible, horrible things that were attached to them - would you not the that?

I'm aware it's farfetched thinking, but the purpose of the post was largely to quell the idea that nothing good ever came out of lockdown
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
49,849
Location
Yorkshire
I was talking about those very specific benefits. What I meant is that, if there is a way to achieve those things without all the horrible, horrible things that were attached to them - would you not the that?
It's just not realistic, and what has actually happened, e.g. deterring public transport, is working towards achieving the opposite anyway.
I'm aware it's farfetched thinking, but the purpose of the post was largely to quell the idea that nothing good ever came out of lockdown
I refer you to my analogy above.

Don't get me wrong; I can think of many more realistic improvements that could be retained.

Moving onto more realistic matters, I'd like to see more people working 3 or 4 days per week in the office with 1 or 2 days at home (See https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/remote-working-preferences-in-the-longer-term.203448/ ), but only if people are happy to do that (not everyone is).

I'd like to see more pubs continuing to offer table service as an option.

And almost all the bus companies who were stuck in the 19th century with "cash only" policies have finally switched to contactless - that's a good thing too.

There are many more...

But make no mistake: none of these required lockdowns. I refuse to accept the lockdown was a good thing; it clearly wasn't.
 

Top