Sunak saves the pints and economy...and the 2M Saga...

Watch
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#1
Would the government lose credibility if it changed from the "led by science... Ermm 2M rule".

What do you guy's think?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/11835472/rishi-sunak-2m-rule-dropped-boris-johnson/amp/Name:  Screenshot_20200611_150537_com.android.chrome.jpg
Views: 18
Size:  191.1 KB
0
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 weeks ago
#2
It's not really tenable and other countries are able to operate at lower distances, ranging from 1m to 1.5m, without a huge issue... I see it going.
1
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 weeks ago
#3
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
Would the government lose credibility if it changed from the "led by science... Ermm 2M rule".

What do you guy's think?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/11835472/rishi-sunak-2m-rule-dropped-boris-johnson/amp/Name:  Screenshot_20200611_150537_com.android.chrome.jpg
Views: 18
Size:  191.1 KB
Keep the pubs shut. We don't need them. But do open up cinemas though.
0
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#4
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
Keep the pubs shut. We don't need them. But do open up cinemas though.
Didn't realise sunak was such a tiny man...i guess those TV cameras hide reality well lol. This phone didn't
3
reply
tmr19
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
Keep the pubs shut. We don't need them. But do open up cinemas though.
Very arbitrary reasoning
0
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
Didn't realise sunak was such a tiny man...i guess those TV cameras hide reality well lol. This phone didn't
Tiny man but great man. Unlike BoJo who is tiny and a loser.
0
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 weeks ago
#7
How can the government lose credibility? They have none anyway.

The 2 metre guidance is about the risk of spreading the virus. There is always the danger that given how little some people stick to rules (inspired by Mr Johnson and Mr Gove) that to make it smaller would mean people would get to a more dangerous shorter distance.
1
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by barnetlad)
How can the government lose credibility? They have none anyway.

The 2 metre guidance is about the risk of spreading the virus. There is always the danger that given how little some people stick to rules (inspired by Mr Johnson and Mr Gove) that to make it smaller would mean people would get to a more dangerous shorter distance.
loool well i should have written in bracket (more credibility in hindsight)....we're starting to see what happens when reopening's are done with sloppy social distancing @Texas @California @Florida.
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by Gundabad(good))
Keep the pubs shut. We don't need them.
That is the most unbritish thing you could possibly have said.
0
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by Napp)
That is the most unbritish thing you could possibly have said.
Regardless, they've been closing at a serious rate for years and years now. This crisis will only accelerate that - how many that were open in mid-March will never open again?
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by Justvisited)
Regardless, they've been closing at a serious rate for years and years now. This crisis will only accelerate that - how many that were open in mid-March will never open again?
Indeed, a mixture of punitive government meddling, stabbed in the back by the breweries and cheapo supermarkets.

Probably quite a few. However, i more took exception to the idea that they should be kept closed for no reason. After all, social distancing and the lockdown in general have been nicely rubbished by the "protests" recently.
0
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by Napp)
I more took exception to the idea that they should be kept closed for no reason. After all, social distancing and the lockdown in general have been nicely rubbished by the "protests" recently.
Two wrongs don't make a right...
0
reply
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by Justvisited)
Two wrongs don't make a right...
No but a set precedent does tend to make things acceptable. If one can run around the cities smashing things its rather hard to support the notion that having a wee drinky in the pub is a grave and present danger to public health.
0
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by Napp)
No but a set precedent does tend to make things acceptable. If one can run around the cities smashing things its rather hard to support the notion that having a wee drinky in the pub is a grave and present danger to public health.
Yes. But I'm still puzzled about this alleged 25-30% of pubs that wouldn't be able to open even with 1m distancing. Just what kind of ant-minded creatures are happy to hang around for extended periods under that sort of cramming in the first place? How is that a relaxing recreational setting?

By the way, I'd have thought the social distancing in restaurants ought to be a lot easier than people seem to be making out. The main rule for diners to observe is that everyone on a given table needs to be from the same household.

Now, consider two tables-for-two in a row, with diners A, B, C and D seated as follows:

A [table] B C [table] D

Given that A and B are from one household and C and D from another, what proximity is the problem here? Not B with C - as long as they don't touch each other they can be even 0.5m apart and still be at no risk from each other as they're always back to back. Likewise, A and C never face each other, nor B and D. So the only pairing that even theoretically need to be considered is A and D - and it should be clear that a spacing of 2m is practically guaranteed (unless everyone's behaving like ants again).

Moreover, A and D don't even have unobstructed respiratory access to each other, being constantly blocked by both B and C. What chance does a hypothetical virus-laden droplet have of passing from A's mouth to D's nostrils for example?
0
reply
Kitten in boots
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 weeks ago
#15
(Original post by Justvisited)
Yes. But I'm still puzzled about this alleged 25-30% of pubs that wouldn't be able to open even with 1m distancing. Just what kind of ant-minded creatures are happy to hang around for extended periods under that sort of cramming in the first place? How is that a relaxing recreational setting?

By the way, I'd have thought the social distancing in restaurants ought to be a lot easier than people seem to be making out. The main rule for diners to observe is that everyone on a given table needs to be from the same household.

Now, consider two tables-for-two in a row, with diners A, B, C and D seated as follows:

A [table] B C [table] D

Given that A and B are from one household and C and D from another, what proximity is the problem here? Not B with C - as long as they don't touch each other they can be even 0.5m apart and still be at no risk from each other as they're always back to back. Likewise, A and C never face each other, nor B and D. So the only pairing that even theoretically need to be considered is A and D - and it should be clear that a spacing of 2m is practically guaranteed (unless everyone's behaving like ants again).

Moreover, A and D don't even have unobstructed respiratory access to each other, being constantly blocked by both B and C. What chance does a hypothetical virus-laden droplet have of passing from A's mouth to D's nostrils for example?
Two problems.

Firstly, a restaurant/pub operating at half capacity due to the need to enforce social distancing may no longer be profitable.

Secondly, you haven't considered the staff. In most pub/restaurant kitchens, space is at a premium. People often work on top of each other. Social distancing will be very difficult to enforce.
1
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by Justvisited)
Yes. But I'm still puzzled about this alleged 25-30% of pubs that wouldn't be able to open even with 1m distancing. Just what kind of ant-minded creatures are happy to hang around for extended periods under that sort of cramming in the first place? How is that a relaxing recreational setting?

By the way, I'd have thought the social distancing in restaurants ought to be a lot easier than people seem to be making out. The main rule for diners to observe is that everyone on a given table needs to be from the same household.

Now, consider two tables-for-two in a row, with diners A, B, C and D seated as follows:

A [table] B C [table] D

Given that A and B are from one household and C and D from another, what proximity is the problem here? Not B with C - as long as they don't touch each other they can be even 0.5m apart and still be at no risk from each other as they're always back to back. Likewise, A and C never face each other, nor B and D. So the only pairing that even theoretically need to be considered is A and D - and it should be clear that a spacing of 2m is practically guaranteed (unless everyone's behaving like ants again).

Moreover, A and D don't even have unobstructed respiratory access to each other, being constantly blocked by both B and C. What chance does a hypothetical virus-laden droplet have of passing from A's mouth to D's nostrils for example?
I'm guessing your a stem student....but beyond that i would point out.....how do drunk people socially distance......
1
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by Kitten in boots)
Two problems.

Firstly, a restaurant/pub operating at half capacity due to the need to enforce social distancing may no longer be profitable.

Secondly, you haven't considered the staff. In most pub/restaurant kitchens, space is at a premium. People often work on top of each other. Social distancing will be very difficult to enforce.
(1) I seriously question the merit of a business model that relies on the kind of extreme proximity implied by the "need" of that strange minority of pubs, and I think you should query it too. Moreover, for much of their opening hours restaurants are far from at full capacity; what's needed is a more even spread of customers throughout the day, in a manner similar to the way staggered commuting times on public transport are being encouraged - and which may well be helped by staggered working days so different people have different lunch hours for example. Plus, I would assume that much of the remaining shortfall would be made up by a rise in takeaways and deliveries to which people have become more accustomed during this period.

(2) All such staff should have face coverings and gloves at all times, maybe face shields too, so that they wouldn't be spreading it to each other even if they had it. Moreover they'll be able to ask for regular tests.
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
I'm guessing your a stem student....but beyond that i would point out.....how do drunk people socially distance......
A good point which applies to mainly-alcohol centres regardless of the social distance involved.
0
reply
Kitten in boots
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by Justvisited)
(1) I seriously question the merit of a business model that relies on the kind of extreme proximity implied by the "need" of that strange minority of pubs, and I think you should query it too. Moreover, for much of their opening hours restaurants are far from at full capacity; what's needed is a more even spread of customers throughout the day, in a manner similar to the way staggered commuting times on public transport are being encouraged - and which may well be helped by staggered working days so different people have different lunch hours for example. Plus, I would assume that much of the remaining shortfall would be made up by a rise in takeaways and deliveries to which people have become more accustomed during this period.

(2) All such staff should have face coverings and gloves at all times, maybe face shields too, so that they wouldn't be spreading it to each other even if they had it. Moreover they'll be able to ask for regular tests.

A good point which applies to mainly-alcohol centres regardless of the social distance involved.
I seriously question your understanding of how restaurant/pubs margins work.

Rather than being an armchair expert, you should get some relevant experience then maybe you'd understand why so many in the hospitality industry are extremely concerned about the next few months.
2
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 2 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by Kitten in boots)
I seriously question your understanding of how restaurant/pubs margins work.

Rather than being an armchair expert, you should get some relevant experience then maybe you'd understand why so many in the hospitality industry are extremely concerned about the next few months.
I wouldn't even worry about the social distancing itself really holding hospitality back, people can ignore that......as far as pubs and just restaurants go.
Clubs are of course a post-vaccine situation...they will never allow 100 ppl anywhere pre-vaccine, which does invariably down pub usage as many people do still pre-game at pubs/bars just to go to clubs.
What i would point to is the subsequent loss of income of 20% of the population, and people in general making decisions about how to spend their money with the possibility of multiple lock-downs (in the winter covid-19 won't be on furlough), speaking of furlough the ending of the scheme will put many people into near poverty, even those with degrees will be challenged in the event of a no deal brexit. Likely firm's will also come up with novel ways of how to employ less people no matter what happens, meaning less (long-term, structurally) people employed and less money for leisure.

I would say the overall economic picture is much more disheartening then specific regulations, rules are there to be broken...people don't/cant/won't spend money they don't have (at least not for long).
Last edited by Realitysreflexx; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by Justvisited)
Yes. But I'm still puzzled about this alleged 25-30% of pubs that wouldn't be able to open even with 1m distancing. Just what kind of ant-minded creatures are happy to hang around for extended periods under that sort of cramming in the first place? How is that a relaxing recreational setting?
Evidently you've not been to a London pub after work, everyone spills out into the street as the bar is rammed, even then there isn't 1m distancing. It's not great, but necessary given the pub to worker ratio.

Or for a genuinely lovely experience, The Old Green Tree in Bath.
https://whatpub.com/pubs/BAT/84/old-green-tree-bath

Look at the second photo, good luck with 1m.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you finding researching unis for 2021 entry?

I have been able to get all the information I need from online research (64)
19.39%
I have tried virtual events and found them useful (72)
21.82%
I have tried virtual events and did not find them useful (61)
18.48%
I would be interested in trying socially distanced or scaled down in person events (69)
20.91%
I want to but don't know where to start with researching unis for 2021 entry (32)
9.7%
I haven't started researching yet (32)
9.7%

Watched Threads

View All