Is not just a few. It's everywhere. Young people did NOT stay indoors.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
Really? Not where i live, why dont you stick to the rules? Are you exempt?
Is "hundreds" of young people representative of the majority?
Whilst we've not defined "young" in the context of this conversation, I know people older than me (I'm mind 30's) who've breached the rules going back to the first lockdown, even when they were themselves clinically vulnerable. I'm not suggesting this is representative of everyone.
Where I live they don’t lock us inside for a start so I don’t have to, I can meet people at a safe distance in a cafe, pub, outdoor service, wherever basically.
But there have been plenty of reports of middle aged people in the UK breaking the “rules” and you’re extremely naive if you think otherwise.
I know loads of mates back home who absolutely haven’t stayed indoors. It’s gotten worse with each lockdown.
But hey man, keep playing the blame game, if the young had just stayed indoors it’d be gone now.
Yes, yes it is, that's why we have a curfew and also why you dont see many old feckers in the video
Right ok, did you see all them 60+ people lobbing bricks and fireworks at the police a couple of weeks back in their masses?? Go find some sand man
Pointing to an incident with a few hundred people doesn't really prove anything as that's still an infitesimally small fraction of young people as a whole. We've seen plenty of incidents of middle-aged people gathering when they shouldn't too but that doesn't prove that people generally aren't complying or trying to comply with the rules.
I mean I would certainly imagine that young people are more likely to disobey the rules. But that's what you'd expect from any group of people who are least at risk but disproportionately impacted economically (and arguably socially too). You can bet your life you'd see less compliance from older people if they weren't directly at risk.
The reality is that most adults of all ages are still complying to the rules to a good standard. Not necessarily perfect, not necessarily obeying every rule at every time, but that applies to all ages.
I mean I would certainly imagine that young people are more likely to disobey the rules. But that's what you'd expect from any group of people who are least at risk but disproportionately impacted economically (and arguably socially too). You can bet your life you'd see less compliance from older people if they weren't directly at risk.
The reality is that most adults of all ages are still complying to the rules to a good standard. Not necessarily perfect, not necessarily obeying every rule at every time, but that applies to all ages.
Yup, it’s all their fault innit. It’d defo be gone if not for the young.
Some of you have learned absolutely zero in the past year.
Fortunately, there are data providers who can actually prove this, rather than a random news article you found on the internet.
Amsterdam saw a 48% reduction in recreational activities over the last month vs. the same period last year. The UK saw a 60% reduction.
Those figures are from smartphone tracking data... those things the youngsters all have. Not quite the rule flouting you expected.
Headline from Het Parool, fake news??
Most corona cases now among 13- to 17-year-olds
The number of corona cases among children is increasing. The number of infections is increasing, especially among 13- to 17-year-olds. Among adults in each group, the number of cases actually decreases.
They just need someone to blame 11101.
Blaming the fecking virus might be a good start I’d say.
Blaming the fecking virus might be a good start I’d say.
that headline had been there for 20-30, 30-40, 40-50 during the pandemic.
So 40% were still out doing their thing according to your smart phone stats? And you think that's a small enough number to lazily claim in young people stayed at home? Work more on your margins. Youl see better percentages of old people sticking home in the last 12 months, and that tells you which of the categories were worse spreaders.
This study even puts doubt into what you're saying from a year ago https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...-sticking-uk-lockdown-rules-study-coronavirus
Where it was believed less than 50% of those under 30 bothered to comply with lockdown.
I didn't blame young people.
Last edited:
The irony of that sentence
Me? Excess deaths in Europe 2020 taught me a lot about the inevitability of this virus and the stupid as feck blame game.
Keep it up, it’s all the young’s fault.
Whats random about actual news?
Well it cant be the young's fault, they've all been inside for 12 months while the aged were out spreading the virus, especially those old cnuts in care homes, the bastards
Ok, where are we stopping “young” at now? 60<
The care home one is a nightmare isn’t it? It’s the indoor home environment where the virus spreads at it’s best, with prolonged exposure and with lots of risk people sharing the same walls.
It’s brought in by staff, most of whom aren’t in their 20’s.
Never let facts get in the way of a good rant.
What are you talking about now? The Pandemic hasn't gone away man
Who said it had?
During the pandemic different demographics have most cases at different times 14-17, 20-30, 30-40, 50-69, and the 20-60’s are more likely to work in jobs where they must go to work. We know the workplace is another Covid favourite environment.
But as I say, keep blaming man, you’ve been doing it for a year so why stop now? It’s those youngies and their parties, the cnuts, Covid wouldn’t still be in Europe if not for them.
Oh who's ranting? Obviously your mental health has gone downhill after a year indoors seeing nobody. You lied a few posts back and I just proved you wrong, why did you lie?
Delivering pizzas on a moped is hardly high risk
Try delivering through the centre of Dublin these days and see how well you do!
over 40 is old now?
Younger and older workers have experienced the brunt of the hit to jobs and pay, with the very youngest in the most challenging position. One-third of 18-24-year-old employees (excluding students) have lost jobs or been furloughed, compared to one-in-six prime-age adults, with these experiences also more common among employees in atypical jobs. Similarly, 35 per cent of non-full-time student 18-24-year-old employees are earning less than they did prior to the outbreak, and 30 per cent of those in their early 60s, compared to 23 per cent of 25-49-year-olds.
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/young-workers-in-the-coronavirus-crisis/
To add some balance here.
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/young-workers-in-the-coronavirus-crisis/
To add some balance here.
Also goes without saying that most of the people who've been happiest to stay in lockdown for as long as possible, judging anyone else who makes even the slightest misstep, are those who are middle aged, comfortably settled in their jobs, relationships, house status, potentially even with older kids etc.
Older people have of course taken the brunt of the mortality and morbidity from this pandemic from the virus itself but it is younger people who have been affected in the jobs market, in terms of their savings, their education, student experiences, educational opportunities at work and fundamentally, they'll be the ones paying for all of this in the future.
Try to have a bit more sympathy rather than just always finding a group to blame.
“Prime-age adults”. Never heard that before. I’m a prime age adult! Feck yeah!
It's ancient!
Where do you live? I suspect not in the UK since we have no curfew.
My point is that the behaviour of a minority, and few hundred is that when you start blaming "the young" (who depending on your definition, could number tens of millions) isn't reflective of the majority.
The vast majority of people I know, young and old, have followed the rules for the most part. The people I know who've had the virus haven't been reckless so far as I'm aware, but still had to go about their business in going to work etc.
Blaming young people is tedious and achieves nothing but to cause an even bigger divide between young and old, which in the UK is arguably pretty significant already.
Add to this that it's the younger demographic who will bear the biggest brunt of the cost of this going forward, which will take a generation (at least) to pay off. Add that to a reduction in jobs and the already difficult job of getting on the property ladder and it's bleak.
That’s an absolutely terrible take.
To be honest, when it comes to 'vaccine passports', I do feel a bit more apprehensive about its use domestically than internationally, especially in countries where the vaccine rollout is going a bit more slowly.
I understand why it might happen but the optics of someone in their 40s or 50s being allowed to head back into the gym or the pub while someone in their 20s can't just because they haven't been offered the chance to be vaccinated yet...is quite harsh.
Having said that, as someone who has already received both doses, I will lord my return to normal lives over all of you plebs for as long as possible.
I understand why it might happen but the optics of someone in their 40s or 50s being allowed to head back into the gym or the pub while someone in their 20s can't just because they haven't been offered the chance to be vaccinated yet...is quite harsh.
Having said that, as someone who has already received both doses, I will lord my return to normal lives over all of you plebs for as long as possible.
I think there are a lot of problems with vaccine passports
It discriminates on various fronts, for example-
Against people of ethnic minority, who are less likely to take up the vaccine for cultural and historical reasons
Against people with health conditions which makes it difficult to take the vaccine
Against younger people on the basis of age
Against people who may choose not to take the vaccine for a variety of reasons including distrust of government, phobia of injections, logistical difficulties, etc
Maybe, but im not bothered. If i have to take a risk catching trains to work etc I dont want people who know they are immune, but may still transmit it, going about their business as normal. Everybody should stay careful until none of us need to.
I think vaccine passports are a quick way to get everybody of all ages to ignore the rules.
What does that even mean? You don’t think the virus works well enough? If so, why should you be able to go about your business as normal after you’re vaccinated?
If you’re genuinely worried about this issue then allowing society to ease off the social distancing gradually, one cohort at a time, is the best approach anyway. Much safer than everyone all getting back to normal all at once.
I’m finding the responses on this really odd. Seems to be straight up jealousy. Dare I say it, slightly immature?!
If you’re offered the vaccine (and your doctor deems it safe for you to take it) but decide to turn it down, then that’s your own tough shit. Much less sympathy with anyone in that situation than younger people who have to wait a while.
This. You can’t complain of you’re offered it but don’t take it. (Medical reasons aside).
What’s happening in the US anyway? Youngest wait the longest?
Ireland seems to be a real outlier with the 18-35s ahead of 35-50s. It seems like a sensible approach to me. Was expecting more countries to go down the same route. Especially when you consider how some of the biggest clusters have been at universities.
If there is a vaccine passport, it should be a simple contactless (NFC) card with your passport photo and name on it which can be scanned at a device and returns either Green (OK), Red (Rejected). That way it’s entirely confidential and between the patient and their doctor whether they are green because they are vaccinated or green because they are exempt from vaccinations. That way anyone making the uneducated decision to not get vaccinated is the only subset which will have their liberties infringed.