Do you think lockdowns work and would you want a full lockdown

Scroll to see replies

No.
National lockdowns are only good at causing mass disruption, sky high stress levels, resentment and financial chaos.

Reply 2

JustOneMoreThing

A national lockdown would be horrendous but it's not what people want, it's what is necessary to stop the spread of the virus that's important.

Reply 3

A_J_B

Original post by JustOneMoreThing

A national lockdown would be horrendous but it's not what people want, it's what is necessary to stop the spread of the virus that's important.

Well i see what you mean but look at India. They had the strictest lockdown in the world but it hasn't controlled the spread at all.
It has instead damaged the economy further

Reply 4

A_J_B

Original post by londonmyst

No.
National lockdowns are only good at causing mass disruption, sky high stress levels, resentment and financial chaos.

Yeah totally agree I am quite anti lockdown as well.
I said something similar to someone today and he assumed I want people to die. Smh

Reply 5

Bexjw

Yes, they do work. No I don’t think we need a second. The cases have increased dramatically but at the moment deaths are still low. The NHS is managing (so far). We need more resurrections, yes and we need a firm plan for winter. Flu season is coming and we’re asking for trouble. A second lockdown will cripple the economy further. There’s also no further scheme or extension to the furlough scheme. No one is going to be truthful and honest with testing/ rules if they can’t afford to live or do the ‘right’ thing.

Basically the usual. Follow the rules and the government hasn’t acted quick enough or strict enough to nip it in the bud/ keep on top of it.

Reply 6

nerviodor

Another national lockdown would cause so much damage to future and current generations. It will probably KILL the economy we worked so hard on establishing.

However, the last national lockdown was effective at reducing the number of transmissions and cases so I guess the question would be financial stability or more deaths?

Reply 7

ellasimmons24

Lockdowns do work but I definitely would not want a second one. People have still not recovered from the first lockdown e.g. people are still unemployed and a lot more people will be made unemployed. Some services have just got back to business such as gyms, libraries and schools. I think it would be particularly bad for the economy and people's mental health.

I think restrictions would suffice such as no mixing between households, people using the initiative to socialise less, party less and not make pointless trips where they would see themselves in crowded situations.

Reply 8

Parziva1

If people are well and healthy = more people can go to work = more money for them = more money for the economy and so I believe a national lockdown would be beneficial because all of this roots to the fact that people's health is a requirement to be protected.

Although the way the national lockdown works, needs to be adjusted to still permit certain activities (such as GPs), while maintaining a strict order of rules, so that this provide a long term solution to a potentially long term problem (if we don't protect ourselves and the people we surround ourselves with).

That's my view :smile:

Reply 9

JaseyB

Original post by Bexjw

Let me know how that works out.

Reply 10

Xarao

Whether we like it or not, a full lockdown is definitely going to be considered heavily in the coming weeks (especially with flu season incoming).

Reply 11

Parziva1

Depends on who your asking, there are definitely pros and cons to both

I think we need to find middle ground, have a national lockdown, with the infrastructure to maintain the economy , etc

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 12

username1339858_

Original post by A_J_B

Well i see what you mean but look at India. They had the strictest lockdown in the world but it hasn't controlled the spread at all.
It has instead damaged the economy further

Yeah so strict people who were away from their hometown at work had no way back and ended to have to trek the few days worth of walking in big big groups.

Also consider that villages in India are poor still. Skme still have to go to the well to collect water so do you really think they had the opportunity to continuously wash their hands?
These type of areas saw a big rise in cases.

Reply 13

A_J_B

With all due respect dont even bring New Zealand into the picture. Their economy is far less active than ours and they can afford to shutdown for as long as possible. And oh, dont even get me started on the fact that the population of New Zealand is 1/3rd that of the metropolitan city of Calcutta in India.