Pubs Open

ClaphamFox

Subscribed
If it was about control, presuambly the no-alcohol thing would be permanent. I somehow suspect it won't be, though.
 

Outfoxed

Subscribed
In April, but they won’t sell alcohol. And still you daft fuckers don’t think this is about control.
For someone that comes across as not believing anything in the main stream media why do you believe stuff that’s in the main stream media?
 

ClaphamFox

Subscribed
Maybe so. I'm just trying to understand what kind of 'control' the government would exert by allowing the pubs to reopen but preventing them from serving booze for a couple of weeks. What could the illuminati - or whoever - actually accomplish by that? We'll all be getting pissed in pubs by June anyway, so what difference would it make?
 
Last edited:

AFCDorset

Subscribed
Maybe so. I'm just trying to understand what kind of 'control' the government would exert by allowing the pubs to reopen but preventing them from serving booze for a ouple of weeks. What could the illuminati - or whoever - actually accomplish by that? We'll all be getting pissed in pubs by June anyway, so what difference would it make?
I think the authorities are working to destroy the social fabric of the indigenous working class.

Pubs, casual/private sector employment, inexpensive foreign holidays, cheap personal transport etc are all in the firing line.

More nasty shit to come, free speech, freedom of information etc.
 

NorthwestFox

Subscribed
It’s the way to get the muslem folks to join in with eat out to help out.
probably all halal meat when they open too!
 

hackneyfox

Subscribed
I think the authorities are working to destroy the social fabric of the indigenous working class.

Pubs, casual/private sector employment, inexpensive foreign holidays, cheap personal transport etc are all in the firing line.

More nasty shit to come, free speech, freedom of information etc.
Still don’t understand what they would gain from this apart from some very pissed off indigenous working classes.

your use of indigenous? Does that mean those rules won’t apply to the non indigenous?
 

AFCDorset

Subscribed
Morning hackney, any snow with you?

To answer your question, think the aim is to devalue and destroy the western capitalist countries and turn them into low wage 'serf' economies similar to China and other countries in the third world. It is partly about redistribution, there is too much wealth tied up with the mature economies and many of the population live 'too' well.

The 'reset' may well be an attempt to devalue western currencies, government overspending and currency devaluation by inflation will reduce the spending power of ordinary people to levels comparable to that of the rest of the world.

It spells the end of cheap mass travel, both international with the restrictions in air travel, and more local, making privately owned and operated transport too expensive. Energy will be rationed by price as indeed will food, particularly meat and animal products.

Motivation and timescale for this difficult to determine, but it is hard for me to see current policy in any other way.
 

What?

Subscribed
There's too much shaggin going on. The plan is to make everyone too knackered through work and too weak through lack of proper snap to be bothered with bonkin. Population reduction sorted
 

ClaphamFox

Subscribed
There's too much shaggin going on. The plan is to make everyone too knackered through work and too weak through lack of proper snap to be bothered with bonkin. Population reduction sorted
What?! Is this true? I hadn't heard anything...
 

sabredunce

Silver Surfer
In April, but they won’t sell alcohol. And still you daft fuckers don’t think this is about control.
Seeing as no one anywhere has any evidence that covid spread is more likely around alcohol, there's no reason other than puritanical paternalism. These kinds of rules were taken to court in New York and thrown out and the owners managed to save their businesses.
There's no data to suggest covid spread is higher at 10:01 PM as opposed to 9:59 PM or two pints rather than three.

It's just bureaucrats being bureaucratic, copying the rules of others to make up for their own lack of imagination.
 

Filbo65

Pitched roofer
Seeing as no one anywhere has any evidence that covid spread is more likely around alcohol, there's no reason other than puritanical paternalism. These kinds of rules were taken to court in New York and thrown out and the owners managed to save their businesses.
There's no data to suggest covid spread is higher at 10:01 PM as opposed to 9:59 PM or two pints rather than three.

It's just bureaucrats being bureaucratic, copying the rules of others to make up for their own lack of imagination.
My local landlady would disagree with you.
Last summer / autumn they had nothing but aggro with "a large minority" of people following the rules at 7pm when entering the pub, but becoming a fucking nightmare to manage by 9pm after a few pints. I also saw with my own eyes the problem of groups of people coming to her pub from other places where they'd been allowed to stand at the bar / mix from table to table / break other rules, and really kicking off when told they couldn't do the same in her pub.
As a result, she ended up supporting the curfew despite initially questioning it.
 
Last edited:

Filbo65

Pitched roofer
You're clearly the expert, presumably speaking from the perspective of a 'national modeller'. But how can you know that certain human-nature behaviours weren't replicated daily, left right and centre, across the country? Where's the surprise in those incidents, to anyone who uses pubs?
I'm fairly sure that time-consuming government-funded research before eventually introducing the rules would've been ridiculed by many in a similar way to your rather dismissive reply.
But the core issue is that the idea of pubs opening without selling beer is a proper message-board nonsense.
 

sabredunce

Silver Surfer
I am an expert and so are you. We've both got an opinion and suppositions, we're both qualified to advise government it seems. I think the core issue is that no small business or shop should be closed at all, when they've demonstrated that they can function safely and effectively. Asking a bulk of the population to commit cultural and economic suicide on an opinion is a bit extreme. A panic measure has become institutionalised.
It's encouraging that this stuff is finally getting to court and emergency injunctions stopping this garbage are being issued. Not that it'll help at this point.

bu.. bu.. but.. the science!

bu.. bu.. but.. the lawsuits! :cool:
 

ClaphamFox

Subscribed
A former colleague of mine committed cultural and economic suicide when he did dry January after his missus shared her 'opinion' that it might be a good idea. The lawsuits against her are ongoing.
 

Filbo65

Pitched roofer
A former colleague of mine committed cultural and economic suicide when he did dry January after his missus shared her 'opinion' that it might be a good idea. The lawsuits against her are ongoing.
And quite right too!
'Dry January' is the work of Satan.
 

Filbo65

Pitched roofer
I am an expert and so are you. We've both got an opinion and suppositions, we're both qualified to advise government it seems. I think the core issue is that no small business or shop should be closed at all, when they've demonstrated that they can function safely and effectively. Asking a bulk of the population to commit cultural and economic suicide on an opinion is a bit extreme. A panic measure has become institutionalised.
It's encouraging that this stuff is finally getting to court and emergency injunctions stopping this garbage are being issued. Not that it'll help at this point.

bu.. bu.. but.. the science!

bu.. bu.. but.. the lawsuits! :cool:
I'm fully reconciled to being an expert in nothing.
 
Top