@wild edges I have the same problem. My OH tells me to hide the chocolate because he devours it and then complains of a "crise de foie" !! Sometimes I forget where I have hidden it. I now hide it in the bookcase or on its side with the CDs.
Precisely @steveTu I was talking about choices and consequences ... you choose to go to a certain country therefore you choose to abide by their entry regulations.
The publican puts a notice on the door ... Proof of Covid Vaccination required before Entry ... if you choose not to have the vaccine you can choose to go to a different pub. If I don't want to be near you because you've chosen not to have the jab then I can choose to go to the pub which has entry requirements. Otherwise I have to stay home simply because you've chosen not to have the jab. Why should your freedom to choose be more important than mine?
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
Some countries have proof of a Yellow Fever jab as an entry requirement. Why shouldn't proof of Covid jab be required. A potential traveller still has the same choice, that is comply with entry conditions or don't travel.
Rules are far more difficult to implement for those already living in a country, but can be if the will exists. I doubt there is the will in this country. There is also the issue of those people who can't take a vaccine for medical reasons. Are we saying they should be locked in isolation for ever?
Totally Dove, it was mandatory - I had to have the jab. Not wishy,washy.
If a pub wants to introduce criteria to allow them to vet their patrons fine. No issue - as long as it's not discriminatory (?who then decides what is and isn't discriminatory?) then no issue eh? How will a pub enforce that rule? BUT, if the Gov introduces mechanisms to force an option to be mandatory then it's wrong. It's just a weak Gov not wanting to upset the voters by restricting 'their rights and freedoms' - which takes me neatly on to:
OK - where are your lines? What else can the publican decide is criteria for entrance? Rights and freedoms...hmmm.. a bit of a minefield. I hate smoking, and smoke kills. Why then was the right of the smoker to smoke in my presence allowed? I like to breath clean air - why is the freedom to drive or fly given any more weight than my freedom to breath clean air?
Freedoms and rights then lead to discrimination - I'm not sure I can get my head round this, but would it be fair to say it is discriminatory when the target has no choice? Age, race, gender, height,weight, hair colour,disability (mental and physical).... But it could also be discriminatory where there is a choice - ie religion? Discrimination is then just what is generally accepted and acceptable at a point in time? Would it be acceptable, even if a pub could work a way of knowing who had been jabbed and who hadn't, to ban those who hadn't? And if pubs can, who else could - buses? Taxis? Shops?
Personally, I would like to see the whole world vaccinated and obeying all the rules. But that isn't the case is it? And all the time the jab is optional people have the freedom to choose - why anyone who could have the jab doesn't baffles and frustrates me in equal measure - but it is still a choice.
What about all the people who drive without licence, tax not, insurance,there are plenty of them,I got run off the road by a drink hit and run back in the 80s,car was written off,and on HP, now days you can insure against, uninsured drivers,you couldn't back then
OK - where are your lines? What else can the publican decide is criteria for entrance? Rights and freedoms...hmmm.. a bit of a minefield. I hate smoking, and smoke kills. Why then was the right of the smoker to smoke in my presence allowed? I like to breath clean air - why is the freedom to drive or fly given any more weight than my freedom to breath clean air?
.
Smoking has been banned in both indoor and outdoor public spaces for quite some years. You may hate smoking and there is no doubt it isn't a healthy habit but you could say smokers have been ( and continue to be )discriminated against. Unfortunately, the government relies heavily on the revenue from tobacco. A similar situation exists with air pollution caused by the amount of traffic ( not the only cause but certainly plays its part ) in endangering people's health. That has been widely discussed but apart from the introduction of electric vehicles ( and what provides the electric ?? ) which the average person cannot yet afford, little has been done in reality to cut the pollution. Reducing the vehicle road tax was hardly helpful. If you drive, you pollute the atmosphere in some form or another......if you fly , you do the same, if you use the internet, again the same. We are all responsible in one way or another for pollution - it would be difficult not to be but I'd suggest we be a bit careful when talking about discrimination as a whole. Those who live in areas where air pollution is not yet a hugely noticeable problem are still suffering - drought, rising sea levels, famine, etc. and we should be thinking about them too - after all, we lucky lucky drivers, smokers and excessive power users could be said to be discriminating against those people whether or not it is intentional.
On a different note and not exactly curmudgeonly but as this thread contains posts about mobile/smart phones, credit cards and banking and purchasing on line just thought I would ask......... I don't have a mobile device nor a credit card but I do my banking online and use a debit card for online purchasing. I haven't encountered any difficulties so far but now wonder if this is likely to be a problem for me in the future ?
Just interjecting in the mandatory/voluntary jab debate a moment; the Government are not currently even considering making the vaccine compulsory. The 'passport' proposal they have mooted includes options to show a recent negative test or proof of a previous infection as well as vaccination. Given that we can all get two tests a week for free, anyone wanting to go to the local pub can get a test without it costing them anything and without being vaccinated. As far as I know, the airlines have a similar range of options.
Just sayin'
As you were........
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
A vaccine passport would just be a practical proof of vaccination status. Government isn't being discriminatory by setting that up. Even allowing or legislating for activities to be restricted for people who are not vaccinated by choice. Discriminatory situation happens when someone cannot get a vaccine but is still unable to do n those activities when lack of vaccination isn't their free choice? For example people the vaccination programs hasn't got around to yet or people who have been advised not to get vaccinated for medical reasons would be discriminated against by not having a passport.
NHS do not have enforced vaccination for things like flu. I've had a few NHS workers among friends and not one has ever had a flu jab. That's actually quite common I got told. Usually when a senior consultant is promoting the flu jab internally, according to hospital policy, only for everyone to know that he's refused the jab every year it's been offered.
A public house is able to legally prevent supplying services for many reasons. Customer won't make contactless payment, refuses to contact trace, showing signs of being intoxicated, not wearing a mask or not having proof of vaccination. A shop can refuse to take payment by coins or notes. Legal tender is very narrow and applies to payments of debt IIRC. Something like getting your boiler fixed then getting an invoice. The plumber has to accept coins or notes as payment of the debt. Services provided creating the debt which can be paid by legal tender such as coins. A shop receives payment before providing the goods or services. They can decide what payment that choose to accept I believe.
IMHO vaccine refuseniks should be refused access to commercial services and goods. Perhaps even having refusal to supermarkets being forced into click& collect or delivery only. Unless there's good reasons they cannot shop this way. I'm not sympathetic to anti vaxxers in any way.
IIRC vaccination for COVID is about reducing risk. That's risk of getting it, of passing it on (lowers level of infectiousness), and of being in a serious condition with it. AIUI there's never been the idea of vaccination ending COVID from the experts. Politicians are another matter.
Holidays? Personally I think every country should stick to itself until things are more under control. I even think business travel should be restricted. Zoom meeting or other ways instead. If really unavoidable then quarantine afterwards.
ID cards I do not think are discriminatory in themselves or affect human rights. However with anything it's possible to abuse human rights or be discriminatory. That is a separate issue. Having a tool doesn't mean that tool will be used in a wrong way. If that happens even our democracy and legal system has plenty of ways to catch it and stop it. Which is a whole other matter, it doesn't always happen. There's a Minneapolis court case which goes towards that inability to stop discrimination. That's another issue all together.
Sorry for the ramble. I read so many points being made I questioned as there were a lot of posts between when I last read this thread. So much to say and a lot refers to several pages so. Hence the ramble.
I know someone who is very savvy who recently had their bank account emptied when they lost their debit card ... over £500 gone. I think that's a good reason to get a mobile phone even if it's the only thing you ever use it for.
Yes a very good reason to have a mobile phone.
When any money enters or leaves my accounts I immediately get a text message advising me of the transaction. The wife was most put out when the service was introduced as every time she did a payment or transfer she got from me the usual "What are you spending money on now" Obviously the replies are unprintable.
I simply don't understand the logic of using a laptop, desktop or ipad, but not using a smart phone. Each and everyone is a computer simply in a different format using a different operating system. The only difference is that a mobile phone uses GSM which most desktops/laptops do not use, but even now you can buy a desktop,laptop or ipad with a slot for a SIM card if you require one.
Whatever device you use there basically all computers using software. There's no reason not to use one over the other. I use them all
'The power of accurate observation .... is commonly called cynicism by those that have not got it.
Posts
The publican puts a notice on the door ... Proof of Covid Vaccination required before Entry ... if you choose not to have the vaccine you can choose to go to a different pub. If I don't want to be near you because you've chosen not to have the jab then I can choose to go to the pub which has entry requirements. Otherwise I have to stay home simply because you've chosen not to have the jab. Why should your freedom to choose be more important than mine?
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
On a different note and not exactly curmudgeonly but as this thread contains posts about mobile/smart phones, credit cards and banking and purchasing on line just thought I would ask.........
I don't have a mobile device nor a credit card but I do my banking online and use a debit card for online purchasing. I haven't encountered any difficulties so far but now wonder if this is likely to be a problem for me in the future ?
Just sayin'
As you were........
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
NHS do not have enforced vaccination for things like flu. I've had a few NHS workers among friends and not one has ever had a flu jab. That's actually quite common I got told. Usually when a senior consultant is promoting the flu jab internally, according to hospital policy, only for everyone to know that he's refused the jab every year it's been offered.
A public house is able to legally prevent supplying services for many reasons. Customer won't make contactless payment, refuses to contact trace, showing signs of being intoxicated, not wearing a mask or not having proof of vaccination. A shop can refuse to take payment by coins or notes. Legal tender is very narrow and applies to payments of debt IIRC. Something like getting your boiler fixed then getting an invoice. The plumber has to accept coins or notes as payment of the debt. Services provided creating the debt which can be paid by legal tender such as coins. A shop receives payment before providing the goods or services. They can decide what payment that choose to accept I believe.
IMHO vaccine refuseniks should be refused access to commercial services and goods. Perhaps even having refusal to supermarkets being forced into click& collect or delivery only. Unless there's good reasons they cannot shop this way. I'm not sympathetic to anti vaxxers in any way.
IIRC vaccination for COVID is about reducing risk. That's risk of getting it, of passing it on (lowers level of infectiousness), and of being in a serious condition with it. AIUI there's never been the idea of vaccination ending COVID from the experts. Politicians are another matter.
Holidays? Personally I think every country should stick to itself until things are more under control. I even think business travel should be restricted. Zoom meeting or other ways instead. If really unavoidable then quarantine afterwards.
ID cards I do not think are discriminatory in themselves or affect human rights. However with anything it's possible to abuse human rights or be discriminatory. That is a separate issue. Having a tool doesn't mean that tool will be used in a wrong way. If that happens even our democracy and legal system has plenty of ways to catch it and stop it. Which is a whole other matter, it doesn't always happen. There's a Minneapolis court case which goes towards that inability to stop discrimination. That's another issue all together.
Sorry for the ramble. I read so many points being made I questioned as there were a lot of posts between when I last read this thread. So much to say and a lot refers to several pages so. Hence the ramble.
Yes a very good reason to have a mobile phone.
When any money enters or leaves my accounts I immediately get a text message advising me of the transaction. The wife was most put out when the service was introduced as every time she did a payment or transfer she got from me the usual "What are you spending money on now" Obviously the replies are unprintable.
I simply don't understand the logic of using a laptop, desktop or ipad, but not using a smart phone. Each and everyone is a computer simply in a different format using a different operating system. The only difference is that a mobile phone uses GSM which most desktops/laptops do not use, but even now you can buy a desktop,laptop or ipad with a slot for a SIM card if you require one.
Whatever device you use there basically all computers using software. There's no reason not to use one over the other. I use them all
'The power of accurate observation .... is commonly called cynicism by those that have not got it.
George Bernard Shaw'