FORUMS FORUMS






RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
25 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!

   WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Safeism
::Off-topic discussion.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years284th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:44 am  
Given recent events and the rise of woke on the left of politics do we think we have a bad case of safeism in this country

By that I mean that we expect the state to ensure that they cover every inconvenience that we might suffer they have a ready made solution for an unpredictability/Black Swan that might happen. I listen to the chancellor and he expected to cover every person with the furlough scheme either employed or self employed, every company should be able to get a CBIL loan regardless of status etc.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Player Coach10530
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 08 200518 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
14th Jun 20 19:3514th Jun 20 19:35LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Leeds
Signature
King Monkey wrote:
Maybe a spell in prison would do Graham good.

At least he'd lose his virginity.

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:36 am  
What would be the alternative/better option?
Surely, for 'safeism' to be an issue it would mean we favoured government intervention during this crisis over a more beneficial option?

I suppose when people have been living in an age where money was printed to bailout the financial industry, and governments have taken corporate institutions into public ownership to stop them from failing, they're probably thinking they're long overdue some of the help they should've been given over a decade ago instead of the banks.
DaveO 
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator14395No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Dec 22 200122 years296th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
4th Mar 24 17:4528th May 22 23:44LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Chester
Signature
Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18
Moderator

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 12:01 pm  
"It is the first responsibility of government in a democratic society to protect and safeguard the lives of its citizens. That is where the public interest lies. It is essential to the preservation of democracy, and it is the duty of the court to do all it can to respect and uphold that principle."

From here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldjudgmt/jd041216/a&oth-6.htm

So the simple answer to your question is "no".

Given the current situation then obviously it's not "safeism" to have a contingency plan for a pandemic.

Especially when you consider a pandemic is identified on the governments own National Risk Register https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61934/national_risk_register.pdf as highly likely to occur (and they were right weren't they) and is the threat that will have the greatest impact on society. Higher even then terrorist attacks.

Add in the fact the government ran pandemic "war game" exercises informed them of the consequences of an event they already deemed highly likely, a pandemic is not something that just occurred out of the blue no one could plan for as I think you wish to imply.

In fact not following any recommended steps due to these "war games" is a dereliction of the governments duty to its citizens. I think we will find in the eventual public inquiry the government of the last 10 years is guilty of numerous dogma inspired failings in this regard such as J Hunt not being prepared to fund a stockpile of PPE in 2017 due to the obsession with Austerity.

As to how far or what the chancellor does in response to the financial impacts of a pandemic, well if they had bothered to plan for it then maybe the actions taken would not appear so haphazard and full of loopholes offering help to some who don't need it and no help to some of those who do.
"It is the first responsibility of government in a democratic society to protect and safeguard the lives of its citizens. That is where the public interest lies. It is essential to the preservation of democracy, and it is the duty of the court to do all it can to respect and uphold that principle."

From here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldjudgmt/jd041216/a&oth-6.htm

So the simple answer to your question is "no".

Given the current situation then obviously it's not "safeism" to have a contingency plan for a pandemic.

Especially when you consider a pandemic is identified on the governments own National Risk Register https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61934/national_risk_register.pdf as highly likely to occur (and they were right weren't they) and is the threat that will have the greatest impact on society. Higher even then terrorist attacks.

Add in the fact the government ran pandemic "war game" exercises informed them of the consequences of an event they already deemed highly likely, a pandemic is not something that just occurred out of the blue no one could plan for as I think you wish to imply.

In fact not following any recommended steps due to these "war games" is a dereliction of the governments duty to its citizens. I think we will find in the eventual public inquiry the government of the last 10 years is guilty of numerous dogma inspired failings in this regard such as J Hunt not being prepared to fund a stockpile of PPE in 2017 due to the obsession with Austerity.

As to how far or what the chancellor does in response to the financial impacts of a pandemic, well if they had bothered to plan for it then maybe the actions taken would not appear so haphazard and full of loopholes offering help to some who don't need it and no help to some of those who do.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member18060No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 27 200222 years284th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
11th Jun 23 20:4411th Jun 23 20:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the road
Signature
Your job is to say to yourself on a job interview does the hiring manager likes me or not. If you aren't a particular manager's cup of tea, you haven't failed -- you've dodged a bullet.

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 12:29 pm  
DaveO wrote:
"It is the first responsibility of government in a democratic society to protect and safeguard the lives of its citizens. That is where the public interest lies. It is essential to the preservation of democracy, and it is the duty of the court to do all it can to respect and uphold that principle."

From here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldjudgmt/jd041216/a&oth-6.htm

So the simple answer to your question is "no".

Given the current situation then obviously it's not "safeism" to have a contingency plan for a pandemic.

Especially when you consider a pandemic is identified on the governments own National Risk Register https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61934/national_risk_register.pdf as highly likely to occur (and they were right weren't they) and is the threat that will have the greatest impact on society. Higher even then terrorist attacks.

Add in the fact the government ran pandemic "war game" exercises informed them of the consequences of an event they already deemed highly likely, a pandemic is not something that just occurred out of the blue no one could plan for as I think you wish to imply.

In fact not following any recommended steps due to these "war games" is a dereliction of the governments duty to its citizens. I think we will find in the eventual public inquiry the government of the last 10 years is guilty of numerous dogma inspired failings in this regard such as J Hunt not being prepared to fund a stockpile of PPE in 2017 due to the obsession with Austerity.

As to how far or what the chancellor does in response to the financial impacts of a pandemic, well if they had bothered to plan for it then maybe the actions taken would not appear so haphazard and full of loopholes offering help to some who don't need it and no help to some of those who do.


This was not meant to be a government bashing exercise - but there you go

I think you on Hunt he didn't want to make the same mistake Brown did when he ordered all that vaccine that simply got binned because things didn't quite turn out as the experts predicted. Hunt had a limited budget, does he spend it on what could be a pandemic or what is genuine clinical need? Taxes are not a bottomless pit?

I only gave the recent Covid 19 responses as examples of where citizens expect total support - others could be bullying at school - this has gone on since Adam but we now seem to expect the state to stop it, mental issues many of which are quite normal neurological responses to life itself - should the state shield every citizen from every kind of adversity?
DaveO wrote:
"It is the first responsibility of government in a democratic society to protect and safeguard the lives of its citizens. That is where the public interest lies. It is essential to the preservation of democracy, and it is the duty of the court to do all it can to respect and uphold that principle."

From here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldjudgmt/jd041216/a&oth-6.htm

So the simple answer to your question is "no".

Given the current situation then obviously it's not "safeism" to have a contingency plan for a pandemic.

Especially when you consider a pandemic is identified on the governments own National Risk Register https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/61934/national_risk_register.pdf as highly likely to occur (and they were right weren't they) and is the threat that will have the greatest impact on society. Higher even then terrorist attacks.

Add in the fact the government ran pandemic "war game" exercises informed them of the consequences of an event they already deemed highly likely, a pandemic is not something that just occurred out of the blue no one could plan for as I think you wish to imply.

In fact not following any recommended steps due to these "war games" is a dereliction of the governments duty to its citizens. I think we will find in the eventual public inquiry the government of the last 10 years is guilty of numerous dogma inspired failings in this regard such as J Hunt not being prepared to fund a stockpile of PPE in 2017 due to the obsession with Austerity.

As to how far or what the chancellor does in response to the financial impacts of a pandemic, well if they had bothered to plan for it then maybe the actions taken would not appear so haphazard and full of loopholes offering help to some who don't need it and no help to some of those who do.


This was not meant to be a government bashing exercise - but there you go

I think you on Hunt he didn't want to make the same mistake Brown did when he ordered all that vaccine that simply got binned because things didn't quite turn out as the experts predicted. Hunt had a limited budget, does he spend it on what could be a pandemic or what is genuine clinical need? Taxes are not a bottomless pit?

I only gave the recent Covid 19 responses as examples of where citizens expect total support - others could be bullying at school - this has gone on since Adam but we now seem to expect the state to stop it, mental issues many of which are quite normal neurological responses to life itself - should the state shield every citizen from every kind of adversity?
RankPostsTeam
International Star7181No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Dec 21 20149 years269th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
17th Mar 24 19:1715th Oct 23 16:05LINK
Milestone Posts
5000
10000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Signature
No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:04 pm  
Nah.The lefties don't want to live in a nanny state,nor a police state.They want their freedoms and their liberties and not have to be subjected to remaining indoors and saving the lives of others.
They know best.Been to university and have Lords and rich people on their side.
They are free and reckless.
They can do what they want.
DaveO 
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator14395No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Dec 22 200122 years296th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
4th Mar 24 17:4528th May 22 23:44LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Chester
Signature
Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18
Moderator

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:17 pm  
Sal Paradise wrote:
This was not meant to be a government bashing exercise - but there you go

I think you on Hunt he didn't want to make the same mistake Brown did when he ordered all that vaccine that simply got binned because things didn't quite turn out as the experts predicted. Hunt had a limited budget, does he spend it on what could be a pandemic or what is genuine clinical need? Taxes are not a bottomless pit?

I only gave the recent Covid 19 responses as examples of where citizens expect total support - others could be bullying at school - this has gone on since Adam but we now seem to expect the state to stop it, mental issues many of which are quite normal neurological responses to life itself - should the state shield every citizen from every kind of adversity?


If you want to use other examples as people wanting total support you need to cite what they are because each case is obviously different. It won't be possible or practical for some to be anticipated to catered for and others it will be (with a pandemic falling into the latter category). There is no generalised answer to the question unless you are some libertarian loon who thinks as a matter of dogma it's every man for himself on everything and the government has next to no role to play (which hopefully the point I made about its duty above deals with).

As to Hunt there is no need to speculate what the motives were to excuse him, it was just to save cash, and he wasn't blocking the purchase of perishable vaccines but PPE (specifically eye protection):

Documents show that officials working under former health secretary Jeremy Hunt told medical advisers three years ago to “reconsider” a formal recommendation that eye protection should be provided to all healthcare professionals who have close contact with pandemic influenza patients.

The expert advice was watered down after an “economic assessment” found a medical recommendation about providing visors or safety glasses to all hospital, ambulance and social care staff who have close contact with pandemic influenza patients would “substantially increase” the costs of stockpiling.


Advice on protective gear for NHS staff was rejected owing to cost

He's now got the brass neck as chairmen of the health select committee to complain about the pack of PPE for NHS staff.
Sal Paradise wrote:
This was not meant to be a government bashing exercise - but there you go

I think you on Hunt he didn't want to make the same mistake Brown did when he ordered all that vaccine that simply got binned because things didn't quite turn out as the experts predicted. Hunt had a limited budget, does he spend it on what could be a pandemic or what is genuine clinical need? Taxes are not a bottomless pit?

I only gave the recent Covid 19 responses as examples of where citizens expect total support - others could be bullying at school - this has gone on since Adam but we now seem to expect the state to stop it, mental issues many of which are quite normal neurological responses to life itself - should the state shield every citizen from every kind of adversity?


If you want to use other examples as people wanting total support you need to cite what they are because each case is obviously different. It won't be possible or practical for some to be anticipated to catered for and others it will be (with a pandemic falling into the latter category). There is no generalised answer to the question unless you are some libertarian loon who thinks as a matter of dogma it's every man for himself on everything and the government has next to no role to play (which hopefully the point I made about its duty above deals with).

As to Hunt there is no need to speculate what the motives were to excuse him, it was just to save cash, and he wasn't blocking the purchase of perishable vaccines but PPE (specifically eye protection):

Documents show that officials working under former health secretary Jeremy Hunt told medical advisers three years ago to “reconsider” a formal recommendation that eye protection should be provided to all healthcare professionals who have close contact with pandemic influenza patients.

The expert advice was watered down after an “economic assessment” found a medical recommendation about providing visors or safety glasses to all hospital, ambulance and social care staff who have close contact with pandemic influenza patients would “substantially increase” the costs of stockpiling.


Advice on protective gear for NHS staff was rejected owing to cost

He's now got the brass neck as chairmen of the health select committee to complain about the pack of PPE for NHS staff.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator12568
JoinedServiceReputation
Jun 01 200717 years120th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
28th Mar 24 23:2225th Mar 24 07:35LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Leicestershire.
Signature
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Moderator

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:29 pm  
I went to the toilet yesterday morning and the council still haven’t been round to flush it.

(‘Credit’ to Alexei Sayle for that one)
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Player Coach1884No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Jul 18 200618 years266th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
30th Dec 23 10:002nd May 23 14:54LINK
Milestone Posts
1000
2500
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Warrington

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:33 pm  
Ornery Optimist wrote:
Nah.The lefties don't want to live in a nanny state,nor a police state.They want their freedoms and their liberties and not have to be subjected to remaining indoors and saving the lives of others.
They know best.Been to university and have Lords and rich people on their side.
They are free and reckless.
They can do what they want.

It's generally better to write about your beliefs and thoughts rather than to second guess those of others.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator12568
JoinedServiceReputation
Jun 01 200717 years120th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
28th Mar 24 23:2225th Mar 24 07:35LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Leicestershire.
Signature
'Thus I am tormented by my curiosity and humbled by my ignorance.' from History of an Old Bramin, The New York Mirror (A Weekly Journal Devoted to Literature and the Fine Arts), February 16th 1833.
Moderator

Re: Safeism : Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:22 pm  
Sal Paradise wrote:
Given recent events and the rise of woke on the left of politics do we think we have a bad case of safeism in this country

By that I mean that we expect the state to ensure that they cover every inconvenience that we might suffer they have a ready made solution for an unpredictability/Black Swan that might happen. I listen to the chancellor and he expected to cover every person with the furlough scheme either employed or self employed, every company should be able to get a CBIL loan regardless of status etc.


While, predictably, I don’t think it is about being woke or on the left, I do think there’s a bit too much ‘somebody should do something about that’... yeah that’s that solved then.

As Lily Tomlin said, ‘I always wondered why somebody doesn’t do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody.’

Although I feel duty bound to take some satisfaction in Johnson, Raab et al. getting a small portion of the flak a Corbyn-led government would have for the same ‘failings’ around the pandemic, I know (not even very deep down) that this isn’t normal and it’d be a massive struggle whoever was in charge, even if they weren’t a shambling gormclops.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach16252
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 12 200419 years57th
OnlineLast PostLast Page
28th Mar 24 19:5527th Feb 24 19:53LINK
Milestone Posts
15000
20000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Signature
Challenge Cup winners 2009 2010 2012 2019
League Leaders 2011 2016

Re: Safeism : Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:58 am  
Sal Paradise wrote:
Given recent events and the rise of woke on the left of politics do we think we have a bad case of safeism in this country

By that I mean that we expect the state to ensure that they cover every inconvenience that we might suffer they have a ready made solution for an unpredictability/Black Swan that might happen. I listen to the chancellor and he expected to cover every person with the furlough scheme either employed or self employed, every company should be able to get a CBIL loan regardless of status etc.


Government has chosen to prevent these businesses from trading so government is responsible for taking care of the economic impacts.
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 276 guests

REPLY

Subject: 
Message:
   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...

Return to The Sin Bin


RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
13m
Rd 6 I Cas A
Chesterrhino
110
24m
TV games not Wire
Alffi_7
2865
27m
The Good Friday Derby Massacre
CarlB
140
40m
Ky Rodwell
Eastern Wild
110
Recent
Game - Song Titles
Wanderer
34291
Recent
BORED The Band Name Game
Wanderer
56012
Recent
Smith - should he stay or should he go
weaver93
359
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
35s
Spare Tickets Friday
post
4
38s
York - 14th April
Spookisback
10
46s
BORED The Band Name Game
Wanderer
56012
1m
Smith - should he stay or should he go
weaver93
359
1m
Challenge Cup
stpatricks
37
1m
New Super League shirts in time for Christmas
Deadcowboys1
115
2m
The official Leon Hayes Thread
Smiffy27
18
2m
Smith out ASAP
Backwoodsman
138
3m
TV games not Wire
Alffi_7
2865
3m
2024 Southstandercom Prediction Competition Week 6
rhinosTY
36
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Another Tigers Defeat As Rhinos Go Level Top
RLFANS News
1
TODAY
York - 14th April
Spookisback
10
TODAY
Stats article
Sir Gregory
5
TODAY
21 man Squads - Devils v Leopards
Cokey
4
TODAY
Squad for Catalan
Smiffy27
17
TODAY
The Wigan Way - New Podcast - Chairman Special
Jukesays
1
TODAY
Dons v Swinton Lions 30 June 2024
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Squad for Sheffield
AdamH
1
TODAY
London Away
Fartown58
1
TODAY
The Bulls away
terry silver
9
TODAY
The official Leon Hayes Thread
Smiffy27
18
TODAY
Saints a
WWste
23
TODAY
Leon Ruan signs on loan
Jemmo
2
TODAY
Wardle
Jo Jumbuck
3
TODAY
Huddersfield - Home
Fartown58
6
TODAY
Max Wood on loan to Bradford 2 weeks
rubber ducki
7
TODAY
Jake Wardle 5 Year deal
Zig
22
TODAY
No grade A for 2025 for Trinity
PopTart
27
TODAY
Cup Quarter Final TV Arrangements
RLFANS News
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS
Another Tigers Defeat As Rhino..
142
Cup Quarter Final TV Arrangeme..
561
2024 Challenge Cup Quarter Fin..
685
Easy Does It For The Dragons A..
589
Warrington Demolish London For..
693
Leigh Leopards Beat Plucky Fea..
744
Saints Triumph Over Disappoint..
724
Easy Win for the Wolves Over L..
962
Dragons Condemn Castleford To ..
930
Leigh Leopards Secure First Po..
1076
St Helens Tame The Rhinos To W..
1047
Wigan Warriors Come From Behin..
1113
Betfred Championship and Leagu..
1089
2024 Challenge Cup Sixth Round..
3875
Featherstone Win Extra Time Cu..
1206
RLFANS Match Centre
Matches on TV
Table 'boards.stats_fixtures' doesn't exist