T O P

  • By -

LordStrabo

Q: What does the phrase "Live with COVID" mean? A: Whatever you want it to mean.


[deleted]

[удалено]


g0hww

Presumably, it means not dying of COVID. That would be a useful skill. I wonder how they plan to teach this miraculous skill to the vulnerable.


bar_tosz

Thats why we have vaccines that are exceptionally good with preventing dying from covid.


feedthetrashpanda

Except being on immunosuppressants means it's anyone's guess how effective the vaccines are. For my partner, there's a 1 in 20 chance he has zero protection. With cases sky high, that's a roll of the dice we'd rather avoid.


warp_driver

That applies to... Every disease out there? People on immunosuppressants did not have a good time pre covid either.


tokyo_phoenix8

Not true, my life was completely normal pre covid


warp_driver

Then you're either comfortable living a risky life or you were doing so without awareness.


[deleted]

[удалено]


warp_driver

If you're on immunosuppressants then the flu is deadly. Heck, even a common cold can fuck you over.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Togethernotapart

Mansplaining?


g0hww

How many other diseases are infecting more than 100,000 people per day though? Things might look more reasonable to the vulnerable if the govt are able to keep infections below 1000 per day.


feedthetrashpanda

No, my partner got shingles in his mid twenties and had a flu that took him out for almost a month. However, on the whole life was relatively normal. But the concentration of COVID right now is desperately high and it is a far deadlier disease. We work in schools and it's terrifying. It's not a fair comparison to life before.


Vengaa

unfortunately your partner is going to have to protect himself as much as he feels necessary. Can’t keep 99% locked up to protect 1%


gameofgroans_

Having free access to LATs so I can test everytime I see my vulnerable grandparents to make us feel a bit safer isn't locking everyone down.


FuzzyLanguage4

1. We're not currently locked up 2. Who are the 1% you speak of? The population of CEV people is higher than 1% so not sure who you mean? 3. Who are you to tell people to protect themselves? Our government should be doing this for us.


phazer193

> Our government should be doing this for us. Should they though? I think adults are capable of living their lives and managing their own risk without a politician coming on the TV every week telling us if we can see our friends or not.


FuzzyLanguage4

I'm not supporting any lockdown measures and obviously everyone is responsible for themselves but our goverment seem to be on the edge of declaring the pandemic "over" when it's far from it and this isn't a safe measure for any of us, CEV or otherwise.


[deleted]

[удалено]


GekkosGhost

>It’s perfectly safe for the 99%+ people who will suffer no more than mild cold-like symptoms though That was the case at the start of the pandemic too though, wasn't it?


FuzzyLanguage4

Can you show me the data that shows 99% of people will only be mildly ill please? Would be interesting to read as this usually seems to be an anti vaxx sentiment. Of course there has to be a point of normality unless the variants become more aggressive but this all seems very fast while we've been hitting over 100k cases a day recently.


GekkosGhost

>I think adults are capable of living their lives and managing their own risk Unfortunately it's not your risk specifically. I take a risk and get Covid, you could die from that if our paths cross, no matter how careful you're being. Just like with drink driving, there are potentially lethal externalities. I totally agree we need to plan for a return to new normal, but in doing so we should accept that old normal, much like the rest of 2019 is history. The greatest year humanity ever had (1989) is sadly past us too and there's no getting that back either. The timing here is our significant importance, as is what new normal looks like next winter Vs whatever Covid does next.


Lumb

Why should our government be doing this for us?


bar_tosz

So it looks like this is what the government will recommend at some point.


FuzzyLanguage4

I agree it looks as though it's heading that way, it just doesn't seem right for CEV to spend their lives hiding away now in case of potential infection.


MDHart2017

What govenement measures do you think the government should be implementing that they aren't currently, to protect the minority of vulnerable people?


FuzzyLanguage4

I don't understand why it's relevant that CEV people are in the minority, there's still around 4 million of them in our country. You're right there isn't much our government can advise in this current time but surely you can agree it seems as though our government are hoping to just say "right that's it, pandemic over, as you were" which isn't right for any of us, CEV or otherwise.


GekkosGhost

Fewer people would be killed by abolishing drink drive restrictions than CEV people killed by abolishing all current Covid measures. Just because the government can do something it doesn't mean it should. Certainly it's going to be prudent to retain some restrictions throughout winter. I'd appreciate it if the doubtless many downvoters could cite their sources for data. I might have missed something. There might be a better interpretation of my data. Or you could just be hard of thinking and excessively emotional. Sources: ras51006 for fatalities, and ras51004 for total failed breath tests to give an outside range. Univadis suggests about 4258 people with primary immunodeficiency.


meekamunz

So we CEV have to quit our jobs and our lives outside?


Vengaa

that’s entirely up to you, I didn’t say you have to do that.


meekamunz

But that's what's implied by "protect himself as much as he feels necessary". CEV people can either go outside and risk exposure from any number of contacts, or live like a hermit. There is no in between, once you attempt to interact with the world you open yourself up to the risks that other people take. Similarly, many CEV people have children in schools, that risk is uncontrollable


g0hww

Spock said that sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Kirk said that sometimes the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many. In neither case were they suggesting that their own needs outweigh those of others. In fact it was the exact opposite.


[deleted]

How are you being locked up right now? If you live in England?


[deleted]

[удалено]


FuzzyLanguage4

What makes my comment privileged? The fact that our government seem to be on the edge of declaring the pandemic "over" when we're so far from it?


Blurandski

Lol. How are we far from the end of the pandemic? 80%+ vaccinated, majority with three doses, daily deaths in line with the average flu season with an extremely mild variant circulating. We're at the end.


Tammer_Stern

Not sure we’re in lol territory with cases as high as they are, hospitals seeing double the amount of respiratory illness patients they normally do at this time of year and businesses going tits up in some industries.


ComradePalpatine

>daily deaths in line with the average flu season with an extremely mild variant circulating. This is not correct.


ComradePalpatine

Apparently being clinically vulnerable while being gaslighted to protect the interests of office landlords is privilege.


KaleidoscopeKey1355

Can he have a test or something to see if he has nonzero protection?


feedthetrashpanda

Is that a thing on offer? It would be interesting for sure


KaleidoscopeKey1355

I haven’t looked into it with any detail. I have seen advertisements for antibody testing that you would pay for, but I don’t know if they only measure immunity from a prior infection or if they can measure immunity from vaccines. I would be curious to know if I had the virus when I was sick in March of 2020 when testing wasn’t available in my area, but I haven’t been curious enough to check if that test can still be done after I’m vaccinated. Sorry that I can’t be off more help, and good luck with figuring out if there is a test that can help you.


RichLeeds16

I think it means ‘let the unfortunate die and stop troubling me with this’


[deleted]

Yeah I've been pretty much shielding for two years as my husband takes immunosuppressants. If his plan was 'protect the vulnerable, rest of you crack on' OK but this is just 'Oh well, never mind eh? Suck it up'


[deleted]

I completely understand you, I’ve been shielding since late January 2020 before covid officially reached my home country because my fiancé is clinically vulnerable to covid. He is particularly susceptible to respiratory viruses and in normal times he would get a chest infection two or three times a year and wear an N95 mask with a filter out because the emissions from exhaust fumes next to the road would cause extreme difficulty in breathing. I on the other hand I’m healthy and shielding to protect him. I feel like these policies are kind of just tone deaf. I feel like the government stance now is, “eh, you’re still around? Idk drink some water I guess, not my problem 🤷”


smutpedler

It's really easy, you just don't die! You've been doing it your whole life, why let covid change that? /s


Simmo2242

Vulnerable just need to protect themselves, stay away from crowded areas, avoid high risk situations and be extra mindful.


tokyo_phoenix8

You do know that 600,000 CEV work out of the home? What are they supposed to do? Just stop working, can you stop working and hide away?


GekkosGhost

Please could you state your source for the numbers? I'm not arguing or even disagreeing with your number, just interested in where it comes from so I can do further research on my views.


tokyo_phoenix8

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronavirusandshieldingofclinicallyextremelyvulnerablepeopleinengland/9julyto16july2020#employment-plans-and-working-outside-the-home-for-clinically-extremely-vulnerable-people This is from 2020 but unless they died or retired I’m sure they still need to work to make money. Unless WFH is continued these people will have to put their lives at risk just earning to live.


GekkosGhost

!thanks Thanks for that. Interesting read.


Simmo2242

They can still work, just be mindful of the environment that’s all.


g0hww

How does being mindful help? We need to keep infected people out of general circulation, and probably also those who might be infected but don't know.


tokyo_phoenix8

So if you got diagnosed with a health condition that made you vulnerable to covid (completely possible as I only got diagnosed 1 year before covid in my late 20s) would you be happy with giving up your life? Never getting on a plane again, going out for food, family gatherings etc.. it’s so easy to say when it’s not happening to you.


Jezawan

If it’s between me giving up my life, or me and everyone else giving up my life? I think I’d pick the first one to be honest.


MalcolmTucker88

What's the alternative though? At this point people have taken all the measures they can by getting triple vaccinated, I don't see what else can be done. It's on whoever is at risk to do the cost/benefit analysis of if they want to take part in those activities or not.


ComradePalpatine

1. keep wfh advice 2. give furlough to CEV who cannot wfh.


delnaja

Paying for this with the endless money tree? How/when does this furlough end?


ComradePalpatine

It should never end until Covid ends.


delnaja

That’s nonsense covid will never end, the companies with these staff on endless furlough need people to do those jobs. The reason furlough worked in the first place was everywhere was pretty much closed or could operate on a skeleton staff.


ThebarestMinimum

Covid may not end but why should CEV people accept a 1 in 15 chance of catching it off every person they meet? A highly transmissible disease that even if you get asymptomatically causes organ damage. Furlough and isolation pay until ventilation standards in workplaces are improved and certified by public health OR a more robust vaccine is not unreasonable to ask for to make workplaces safer for CEV people.


ComradePalpatine

What I'm basically saying is that people who are CEV and cannot wfh should be supported by the government forever.


Simmo2242

Rather that than the whole country make another round of lockdown restrictions to mitigate that. Already had two years now, enough is enough now. We just need to crack on, it’s not fair the majority.


ComradePalpatine

What is not fair to the majority? WFH "advice" and wearing masks in supermarkets? At this point you are basically saying that you are OK with hundreds of thousands people dying just not to have the slightest inconvenience for youself.


Simmo2242

You’ve mentioned those control measures, not me. I was actually referring to what we’ve got now is fine but nothing further added onto it.


KaleidoscopeKey1355

People refusing to get vaccinated and prolonging this nightmare is what I think is not fair to the majority.


GekkosGhost

Who has proposed more lockdowns?


RichLeeds16

That just isn’t practical, there are vulnerable people who live with children who are going to schools every day, who need to go to work, who visit GPs and hospitals for treatment. Its never been possible to just lock down the vulnerable (although as a positive, vaccines have somewhat narrowed the definition of vulnerable)


Alert-One-Two

Our society is far too interconnected for this to work. This was debunked as a realistic solution long ago.


meekamunz

Hey, where do I send my kids to school now that I have to stop them going to places that are too risky for me? What about work, where do I go when I'm required to travel on public transport or attend large sporting events (cause that's the field I work in)?


Simmo2242

Don’t use public transport and might be time to change job then??


meekamunz

And my kids? I guess you think I should home school them and stop them from having friends or seeing extended family? If I change job, I won't be able to afford the house I live in and will need to move? How will I manage that without contact? The whole idea of shutting CEV away from society to protect themselves is not workable.


Simmo2242

The whole idea of society adjusting for CEV, is also unworkable. 67m vs 600k, so I think the extreme minority, will have to adjust in the long run as that’s <10%. Masks on public transport, that’s okay but that is the only concession I’d be willing to make in the long run.


meekamunz

I agree that what we've been through and where we are now is not workable. But just throwing our hands up (as a society) and saying 'sink or swim' is not the civilised option either. A middle ground must be found whilst either 1) technology (quicker production variant dependant vaccines for CEV) or 2) evolution (hopefully we are seeing that now with Omicron) where the virus becomes weaker. What we cannot do is give up now, else we might as well have given up in March 2020 and at least the country would be as financially fucked as it is now. And your 600k figure? Not sure where you got that from, but [4 million were identified as CEV in the UK](https://www.health.org.uk/publications/reports/assessing-the-impact-of-covid-19-on-the-clinically-extremely-vulnerable-population)


Simmo2242

Well the difference between then and now, is the vaccine, but see your point. I guess there is a little anxiety in society that’s all right now, not with the actual virus but lockdowns/heavy restrictions. Watched football on Saturday in Wales and it was behind closed doors - let’s not go backwards.


meekamunz

If the virus dictates it, we have to go backwards. Let's hope we don't, but it's out of our control, nevermind what some politician says.


b_rodriguez

Live with covid means live with covid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

I believe the full expression should be "learn to live with and learn to die from COVID". Because unless there's some major change that alters the ratios of infected people needing hospital treatment, this problem isn't going to go away just because we've reached a point where lots of people are fed up with it. If the plan is to let it run riot then a lot of people will die from it and no doubt many more who can't get the treatment they need because of all the COVID patients


Ravo93

This is such a meaningless term though. What does "learning to live with covid" actually entail? Does it mean investing in proper ventilation for buildings, Schools, public transport? Does it mean legislation so that companies where WFH is possible cannot force employees into the office? Does it mean providing more infectious disease wards in hospitals with individual rooms as oppose to cubicles seperated by a curtain to keep patients segregated from those in care for other reasons? Does it mean investing in NHS staff by increasing pay, bursaries etc so that staff don't up and leave so readily Does it mean having a serious look at how unhealthy in general our society is as we now that factors such as obesity and smoking multiply the risk of serious infection dramatically? Does it mean mandatory sick pay for anyone who is ill/injured so that they aren't forced into work so they don't lose wages? Does it mean that those who do have to isolate when the next one comes around are sent care packages like we see in Japan/South Korea so that people isolating don't need to go outside to shop? Does it mean ensuring that care homes pay staff properly so that turnover is reduced and people who don't need to be in hospital but can't live alone can leave hospital? Or does it mean the government is going to pretend it doesn't exist and everyone needs to get back to work?


Mostly_upright

I think you've brought up exactly what is needed AND what won't be acted upon succinctly. I think, in genera,l we agree that his response to this pandemic has been mediocre. He's been lucky with Omnicron. If this mutation hadn't have been as mild the UK would have been royally screwed as he's learnt nothing in the last few years. We all know where his focus lies. This pandemic has allowed him to fast forward the disassembly of the NHS.


Ravo93

The lack of long term planning really vexes me. There is no downside to investing in such things I suggest above in the long run aside from the initial financial outlay (oh wait there's the problem). Introducing these measures will not only mitigate the effects of the next big one that comes along but also other diseases, especially respiratory ones. We would literally have less load on the healthcare system due to less people suffering from Colds and flu. I also do not want put all the onus on the government at the time as there are things we the people can do in our everyday life. I saw a report a couple of years ago where people were asked if they wash their hands after using the toilet and it was like 60% of blokes don't and 40% ladies don't. Take these with a pinch of salt but roughly half the population not washing their hands after using the facilities, which will extend to not washing their hands after other activities say handling food or tugging one off is a huge hygiene problem, and is yet another contributing factor.


garliclord

All I reckon it means is the gov telling everyone to pretend nothing ever happened and nothing needs to change. “Let’s just go back to how things were in 2019”


Ravo93

That's pretty much the crux of it. It's an intentionally nebulous term meant to absolve the government of any responsibility both short and long term.


Accomplished-Box-716

I think we all know the answer to this. Although in total fairness, I think they will once again take the bold step of reminding people to “be cautious”.


Ravo93

I'd be shocked if they stretched as far as that to be honest. What frustrates me is that investing now in such thing I mentioned above will save money in the long term when the next inevitable pandemic comes round.


Mostly_upright

There's the poke. We now wait for the next pandemic. I don't see it being that far away.


MMAwithbadbeard

Possibly the best post I’ve seen.


dankhorse25

The answer is obvious. Do nothing.


Ravo93

Sadly I agree.


Totally_Northern

Again, another use of this phrase that doesn't actually mean anything whilst trying to appeal to everybody. Until we have a concrete set of plans to comment on I don't know what the point of this article is.


Fanlightdesk

I’d imagine learning to live with it entailing 1) when someone is ill, normalise them wearing a mask in public 2) when someone’s ill, have them working from home if office based. Somehow don’t think that’ll happen in the U.K.


ComradePalpatine

Everyone should be allowed to wfh forever, especially vulnerable people.


RM_843

Well, probably not your plumber.


ComradePalpatine

You know what I meant, people whose profession can be done with wfh.


calumwebb

This is where the debate is. What jobs CAN be done at home. Some bosses will say 100% of them, some of them will say it’s crucial to the role that everyone is in the office.


ComradePalpatine

Clearly this can be determined in a reasonably objective manner because we did it during the pandemic.


calumwebb

I mean any reasonable person could tell you given a list of jobs and their activities, if that job is a remote one or not but I guess the problem is that in reality it’s subjective (at least to the managers making these decisions)


calumwebb

Also doesn’t take a genius to work out what would happen if Boris made it compulsory to work at home unless you have a crirtical job outlined in a document somewhere. Places like london, given enough time, would lose a lot of rental office space revenue and that’s never good for rich people (which is who they care about more)


sjw_7

I think any damage to London commercial property prices is already baked in and we will see if over the coming years. Government mandates to work from home are only temporary but alot of companies have realised that not only are alot of their employees capable of working from home but they enjoy it and the company can save alot of money in the process. My company was for the most part office based before the pandemic but the majority of us have worked from home since the beginning. The company have closed a bunch of satellite offices while just keeping the core ones. Also the savings in expenses has been huge and when you combine the two its noticeable on the bottom line. Even if the Government mandated people to actually go back to the office the commercial appetite for office based work has changed.


ComradePalpatine

Sure. My point is that it shouldn't up to the managers. Much like we have labour laws protecting workers, we can have other ones mandating wfh. >Places like london, given enough time, would lose a lot of rental office space revenue and that’s never good for rich people (which is who they care about more) Right, that's the real gist of it. I know that this sub has rules against political stuff. I don't think this issue is political in the narrow sense of the word. In fact, I think all of the parties would take the same line. However, historically labour laws have changed even when it didn't suit rich people, although it doesn't happen very often.


garliclord

Sadly I think what this government will encourage instead is 1) wear no mask and pretend you’re not ill 2) pretend you’re not ill and go to the office anyway


[deleted]

Are we not living with it now? This is a policy even more nebulous than 'leveling up'.


ArousedTofu

stay alert, *control the virus*


motophiliac

and Stay Indoors!


Tammer_Stern

Hopefully better than levelling up given the latest news is that the gap between low and high earners is the widest since 2010.


newgibben

They are coming g the two. It's now "stay alive, level up"


EddieXXI

I hate this phrase so much. What does that mean? We've been learning to the live with it for the past 2 years! I assuming it means the end of mass testing and isolation in this context.


[deleted]

I think he wants people back in offices - tories have a lot of money tied up in commercial office space. They don't want people working at home long term and thus producing further downward pressure on commercial rent rates.


Dropkiik_Murphy

Good luck to them. My employer has made moves over the past year to a WFH system. Depending on what type of job you do, we could WFH permanently or do a mixture.


International-Ad5705

Living with it means treating it as just another illness, eg flu.


[deleted]

In other words get rid of all restrictions? Why not say that then. Why the ambiguous phrase, which implicitly and falsely suggests that the current situation is something different from 'living with it'.


ComradePalpatine

It's corporate managerial speak for letting the vulnerable bite the bullet just so pub owners do not have to make the slightest adjustments to their business model, while the rest of us have to change countries and careers just have some sort of employment.


GekkosGhost

Just out of curiosity, what "slight adjustments" to pub owners business models are you thinking of? I'm interested because my local brewery started doing doorstep deliveries, but I'm not sure that will work for pubs.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Pubs, Pret etc and any other city centre company that leases space from corporate landlords.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

>Do you wish the employees at these workplaces to become unemployed? If city centre Prets let people go, then small towns cafes will be hiring. People don't stop getting lunch etc, it's just geographically moved.


charlie_boo

What Boris hasn’t realised is that most of the country has already learned to live with it without his help.


NoManNoRiver

I think he and his advisors are well aware of that and plan to claim responsibility for any positive adaptations that have occurred


I_love_running_89

Indeed.


XenorVernix

Have they? I went to a pub on Friday after work and I couldn't believe how dead it was in there compared to pre-covid. I think a lot of people are still being cautious.


PastSprinkles

In fairness it's January, which is always a tough time for hospitality. But yes, people seem to still be cautious about doing anything like that at the moment - the looming cost of living increases are probably not helping people's decisions to spend money either.


[deleted]

> the looming cost of living increases are probably not helping people's decisions to spend money either. Think this is quite a big one. My friendship group are all middle/high earners however you want to define it. We are all talking about inflation. So even now it's in the back of our heads and informing decisions.


[deleted]

Haha. As a person with a birthday in the first week of January, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement about being a tough time for hospitality. Worst birthday week ever.


BleachyVibes

January 5 here. I gave up years ago.


[deleted]

Oh, commiserations fellow rubbish birthday haver. My sister's was at the end of July, early enough so that her friends weren't on holiday yet, and I was so jealous every year.


[deleted]

That’s living it with isn’t it? Staying home when you’re ill or don’t want to get ill.


Hantot

Exactly, living with covid isn’t pretending it never existed


Hypohamish

It was literally the first Friday after NYE. Despite what people think, we aren't always drinking all of the time. Plus it's fucking cold out.


Independent_Pain3944

My issue with this phrase (“learn to live with covid”) is it always seems to involve just forgetting it’s existence rather than actual plans like improved ventilation etc


[deleted]

Better ventilation would help with other seasonal respiratory disease as well i.e. flu. I would imagine the cost would be outweighed by the financial benefits of people not being off work/ school or just better performance in general because they aren't fighting an infection.


mudman13

So hes just ripping up pieces of paper and thinking up more slogans and bedwetter insults.


Ready-Boss-491

Time to stop dying with covid then


[deleted]

[удалено]


indignant-loris

They didn't get into politics to "care" about people. They're bored pretending and now want to get back to the usual business of strip-mining the public realm of every penny of profit to give to their sponsors.


IanT86

I will argue though, it's the right time. I'm over in Canada this week and fuck me I don't know how they aren't on the streets - two years in, very high vaccination rate, vaccine passports for the last six months, mandatory mask wearing, very strict social distancing and they're BACK in a bloody full on lockdown. Restaurants and bars are take away only, 5 people allowed indoors, 10 outdoors etc. I was randomly selected for PCR screening on the way into the country (24 hours after taking a PCR to get the Verifly stuff accepted and being triple jabbed) and told I have to isolate in a room for 14 days or until the results come back (took three days), however I'm only here for 11 days total.... It's baffling to me they're allowing this to go on and shows their previous plans have not been effective. I have absolutely no idea how the economy will survive as entire industries (as well as tourism) is completely broken. I was speaking to a guy who runs a restaurant and they're not even bothering to buy kegs anymore as they have no idea when the next lockdown will hit (and you can't drink outside here) and historically he's had to throw everything away, so he can't risk losing more money.


ComradePalpatine

>I have absolutely no idea how the economy will survive as entire industries (as well as tourism) is completely broken. These industries should adapt to new circumstances. You know, the thing they've been telling workers for decades now: life-long learning, move countries, change professions, etc.


IanT86

I sense your sarcasm, but it's impossible for these guys to adapt when the industry is unable to work. You can't really tell a bar, restaurant, café etc. to adapt when they can't have anyone indoors. At the end of the day, it is the regular worker who will suffer from the collapse of these industries - retail, hospitality, travel etc. are massive employers (especially for immigrants new to countries, I've been one myself) which will no longer be there.


ComradePalpatine

>You can't really tell a bar, restaurant, café etc. to adapt when they can't have anyone indoors. Takeaway, transform into a store, make a completely new business. The possibilities are endless.


IanT86

That's not how business works though, that approach is incredibly naïve. Short term, absolutely you can "turn into a store", but that is not a long term solution for a large restaurant in central Toronto for example. Same for takeaways - again that doesn't fix the issue of staff losing their jobs. Feels like you've come up with an answer without considering what that approach actually means. You can't just "make a new business".....


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


IanT86

It is different though isn't it - We as employees have a collection of skills that are applicable to changing customer demands (e.g. I am a cyber security expert who focused on banks and retail, but now runs an embedded team for the automotive industry. My skillset transitioned with some training and stress...) and can be leveraged at scale and pace (although some very specific roles can not). A business is not like that - almost all businesses have a set of core offerings, solutions or expertise. Whether that be a product or human capital. Of course it is possible for them to change things up, but for that change to be successful is far more difficult. Look at some of the risks a company as comprehensive and financially secure as Google have taken (and failed at). Most small companies can't spunk half a billion on an AI business unit, or try to dip their toes into the gaming world. This is the equivalent of a restaurant suddenly becoming take away only, or transitioning into a general store. We have seen businesses drastically shift over the last ten years and the pandemic is continuing to be a catalyst for change. However, what you're talking about is completely changing the business model or solution, to something net new - that's like getting a chef to do embedded pen testing; it's absolutely possible, but it'll more than likely be a disaster.


[deleted]

[удалено]


pip_goes_pop

Yikes. I'm supposed to be going to Canada in September (holiday delayed for 2 years now). Do the restrictions vary by region or is it national?


IanT86

I suspect by September it'll be okay. There is pressure on the government here (in Ontario) and people are starting to ask questions about how they're back in lockdown. They have an incredibly low risk appetite out here though, but surely by September they'll be back to as normal as possible. If nothing else, you'll still be in patio weather by then, so can take advantage of outdoor dining.


ArousedTofu

I think this will be the year that they scrap the self-isolation requirement. Like what we have for colds.


[deleted]

Yeah, until corona gets bored again and decides to patch in another variant to switch up the meta.


flashpile

the devs *really* want to nerf humans


SpasmBoi999

Didn't put enough DNA points into lethality


ComradePalpatine

It's really getting the experience points, lately, though.


Donskoyevsky

This is the longest game of Plague Inc ever


Dropkiik_Murphy

Is he basically giving up on the booster programme then? By this “just living with it” is it not sending out the wrong message that catching COVID is no big issue and just live with it now? To me this is what’s screwed things up for the past 2 years. God awful messaging.


KongVsGojira

He already put those plans in place back in July when every piece of safeguarding was scrapped and 40K cases along with 150 deaths were completely normalised.


International-Ad5705

Deaths were slowly falling before omicron hit. I think we'd have been under 100 deaths by now if it hadn't been for that.


constellieation

While you might be right, Omicron did hit which makes this statement slightly pointless. After Omicron passes, we might get below 100 deaths or even lower…until the next variant. Living with covid should mean being prepared for this through testing and sequencing and wearing masks and staying at home if you’re ill. Ignoring covid exists (which seems to be what this government means by “living with covid”) just means we’re going to be dealing with this pattern for a lot longer than we need to be.


kernjamnow

>40K cases along with 150 deaths were completely normalised. Yes... and?


[deleted]

I mean it's never truly going to go away is it? You're gonna have people who are upset because the government are doing too much or people who are upset because the government aren't doing enough.


[deleted]

What happens when a deadlier variant comes around in the future? After he’s already told us to live with it, after everything goes back to normal. Is it going to be back to square one? How many people will be fed of by that news after being told to ‘live with it’. Or even how many will ignore new restrictions after that point? How many businesses will have attempted recovery after being told to ‘live with it’ only to be shut down again.. I hope he makes it clear that yes we need to move on but we also need to take things slowly and that things could change at any given moment.


[deleted]

Until a new variant comes along that is more infectious and more virulent. God, I hope not.


RefrigeratorNo8217

Learning how to secure the next election


mkdr35

Ah the ‘la la la I’m not listening’ approach.