Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 10:12:01 GMT
simonb s If you're confident that the rulers are infallible, and won't impose what turn out to be bad rules, that in the fullness of time prove to have been very harmful, then I suppose such a blanket judgement is possible. But achieving that blind acceptance and faith in rules isn't easy, and I'm not sure that history shows that subservience to orders is good in every instance either. New rule - the Rulers have ruled, through their Parliament, that the UK will no longer be a member of the European Union. Yet simonb will be aware that numerous 'dickheads' emerged from the woodwork saying 'this is a bad rule, this rule will have bad consequences, this rule will not bring about the good outcomes that the Government is telling us it will'.
There are still those who believe it would have been to the greater good and welfare of the people of the UK, to resist sufficiently in order to make the 'bad' rule unenforceable .... even though Boris and Brexiteers might label them 'dickheads' or 'Remainiacs' for opposing the rule. If it's any consolation to simonb, perhaps his dystopian society of total compliance will become reality once compulsory vaccination for all, starts doing its work on the human system. It might herald a golden age of unquestioned State rule following for all future generations.  |
|
simonb
TFF member
Posts: 1,206 
|
Post by simonb on Sept 8, 2020 10:57:06 GMT
Not sure I would go as far as compulsory vaccinations but possibly lobotomies for Brexiteers ?
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Sept 8, 2020 13:09:34 GMT
It might herald a golden age of unquestioned State rule following for all future generations. Although, as with many questions you pose, AJ, it is much more likely that it will not. Not surprised to see you adopting the faux libertarian position on this. It is the sheep-like followed dogma of the madhouse, after all. It might read better if you tied it all up with your TUST hysteria, though.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 13:38:04 GMT
Rob You scallywag, Rob  Don't think I've indicated that it was anything other than a personal opinion. However, as you've now piqued my interest, perhaps you could inform or link to the genuine libertarian position on this, as I'm curious to see how badly out of step I am compared to the real thing ? |
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Sept 8, 2020 21:29:07 GMT
John Stuart Mill probably nailed the sensible approach to liberty 160 years ago.
The individual ought to be free to do as she/he wishes unless she/he harms others. The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.
As we all know, he took advantage of that freedom to make himself particularly ill on half a pint of shandy.
John Stuart's shandy drinking harmed nobody.
People refusing to wear masks on public transport fail the harm principle. As for those who actively incite others not to wear masks ...
Never quite sure whether AJ is a parody trying to wind people up by posting what he knows to be nonsense. I hope he is.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 8, 2020 21:59:37 GMT
The individual ought to be free to do as she/he wishes unless she/he harms others. The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. People refusing to wear masks on public transport fail the harm principle. As for those who actively incite others not to wear masks ... Similar principle that was quoted to me by a lecturer - “your right to swing your fist stops at my face!” link - this Devon Live article shows the trauma that healthy 29 and 33 year olds have gone through locally after catching this illness, so just because you survived doesn’t necessarily mean you are fine. As I have said before, it is finding the right balance between health and the economics which go together hand in hand, disregard one of these and it will affect the other...... |
|
|
|
Post by stig123 on Sept 8, 2020 22:18:04 GMT
Not sure how the season is going to start if groups of 6+ are now illegal.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 9, 2020 6:56:47 GMT
Not sure how the season is going to start if groups of 6+ are now illegal. - The good news is that organised sports events are exempt. The government now has data from track and trace to introduce targeted measures and my understanding is coronavirus has been particularly spreading in homes, pubs and restaurants and mainly in the young adult group. Hence this restriction. Luckily, football is an outside event where there is a much reduced chance of transmission. I suppose it is up to fans and football authorities to prove that is the case..... |
|
|
|
Post by stig123 on Sept 9, 2020 8:43:01 GMT
Thanks rjdgull...very useful link. For the record we have been in lockdown/State of Emergency in Morocco since mid March.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 9, 2020 11:43:05 GMT
Thanks rjdgull...very useful link. For the record we have been in lockdown/State of Emergency in Morocco since mid March. Wow! |
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 14, 2020 21:07:16 GMT
link - letter written by undersecretary of sport still targeting fans back in from Oct 1st. Devil will be in the detail.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 15, 2020 17:11:23 GMT
link - The national league Chairman has written to the government requesting as a temporary measure of up to 1000 fans being allowed back into stadia for the start of the season as per the validated pilot events in September. Apparently the social distancing capacity of each stadium of around 20% to 30% has been calculated putting ours somewhere between 1300 and 1950.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 17, 2020 7:04:19 GMT
link - I see that a number of EFL clubs are hosting up to 1000 fans this weekend in what is probably the last trial period before welcoming fans back in October. Of course there is a lot of uncertainty out there with cases of coronavirus rising but my guess is that a limited number of fans will be allowed back in and thereafter monitored to ascertain the impact on cases. Clubs across all sports have assured government they have the appropriate procedures in place and of course if they cannot get fans in and then in increasing numbers then the economic impact will go from bad to worse.....
|
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Sept 17, 2020 9:29:33 GMT
link - I see that a number of EFL clubs are hosting up to 1000 fans this weekend in what is probably the last trial period before welcoming fans back in October. Of course there is a lot of uncertainty out there with cases of coronavirus rising but my guess is that a limited number of fans will be allowed back in and thereafter monitored to ascertain the impact on cases. The game to keep an eye on is the Forest Green one. The New Lawn with a capacity of just over 5000 with 2000 seated is the closet to Plainmoor in terms of set up. Brunton Park, which is the largest non all seated ground in the country with a potential capacity 18,000 does however have a 6000 capacity all seater stand which I would imagine will be the only stand in use on the day. All the other grounds are all seater. It will be interesting to see whether FGR cram their 1000 crowd into 2000 seats or whether they use some standing capacity. There is nothing for us to learn from the other games, except possibly how entry and exit to and from the game is handled. |
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Sept 18, 2020 11:12:53 GMT
|
|
