14 ms·

On my walk to work this morning, I detoured down a local main street, curious to see what shops were considering themselves 'essential' and remaining open. App

On my walk to work this morning, I detoured down a local main street, curious to see what shops were considering themselves 'essential' and remaining open. Apparently this time around, travel agents and jewellery sellers have added themselves to the list, with a few barbers clearly operating illicitly behind half-drawn shutters. I was bemused by the very chi-chi local middle class deli near my home insisting they'd be staying open when I enquired on Saturday evening. I mean, sure they sell food, but really - I'm unsure how vital to survival artisanal cheese and pasta is! Bluntly, without the sincere threat of fines or whatever, no action will be taken. UK-dwellers' sense of entitlement to 'freedoms' seems drastically diluted compared to what I witnessed on the continent a few months back, when I was able. We deserve everything we get. - ed, whups - clearly I meant something like 'drastically inflated', not 'diluted'.

jkinudsjknds 6y ago
I don't know if I agree that a restaurant selling artisinal cheeses should be held to different standards than the lowest common denominator of nutrient gruel restauranteers.
adwww 6y ago
Re the deli and other quasi essential shops, it would seem unfair if they closed when you can still buy your fancy cheese and olives in a supermarket.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  I don't know why you expect it to be fair. The policy needs to be effective first and foremost. Schemes like furlough are there to support people who are most affected.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  The issue isn't really whether that shop is essential. The issue is that the greeting card store next door is also open, because they've decided they're essential. And none of these stores (including the super market) is enforcing mask requirements because none of the others are and they don't want to be the only one. In 1000 little steps you are suddenly miles away from a real lockdown. You're basically BAU, but the pub is shut ever other week (unless you buy a scotch egg in which case it is also essential). I don't care if people are eating gourmet olives. But we need to realise that making excuses for doing nothing is still doing nothing.
  - Izkata 6y ago
    It's essential to the owners or their employees, who may risk losing their home if they can't make a living. Lockdowns have gone on long enough that people are deciding to risk it because they have far more pressing concerns.
jmnicolas 6y ago
> UK-dwellers' sense of entitlement to 'freedoms' Seriously? We (the West, I'm not from the UK) are losing our freedom at an unimaginable speed even a few years ago and you think freedom is negotiable? I find this appalling how easy we ease into a dictatorship everywhere in Europe.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  It's interesting that no one seems to give a shit about real freedoms like free speech or democracy, detention without trial or access to lawyers. But when you close the pubs (or the artisnal pasta makers), suddenly we're on a dictatorship.
  - detritus 6y ago
    Hence my enclosing Freedoms in single quotes. I tend to communicate quite drily - that's often hard to put across online.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      I think you're exactly correct. It drives me nuts when people talk about freedom, they have no actual idea what freedom is or takes and their actions undermine it. Freedom doesn't mean "I can do whatever I like with no consequences", but that's what people really want. Freedom is just a better sounding word than selfishness these days :( <Steps-down-from-soapbox>
      - carlmr 6y ago
        >Freedom doesn't mean "I can do whatever I like with no consequences" Depends on your definition of freedom. The issue with this kind of freedom is that your freedom encroaches on other people's freedoms, so most societies agreed that we should have less freedom in favor of fairness. Exactly where the trade-off is to be made is subjective and cannot be derived from facts alone. We have a lot of freedoms that encroach on other people's freedoms, it's impossibly to make a clear cut on where fair ends and personal freedom begins. Allowing people the freedom to sell sugar will inevitably lead to more diabetes and earlier death. It tastes good and it's addictive. Sugar costs a lot of people some of their freedom to live and move. But if we didn't allow selling sugar we would take away the seller's freedom and the freedom to choose from the consumer.
shalmanese 6y ago
> I was bemused by the very chi-chi local middle class deli near my home insisting they'd be staying open when I enquired on Saturday evening. I mean, sure they sell food, but really - I'm unsure how vital to survival artisanal cheese and pasta is! Let's not repeat the mistakes of the first lockdown. If you close down too many places, all that causes is everyone cramming into the same few places still open, causing superspreader events. At one point, LA shut down outdoor farmers markets and many cities including London slashed their public transit schedules, leading to overpacked busses and trains.
- motohagiography 6y ago
  In the march/april stage of the pandemic, I chose to shop at such "shi-shi" places exclusively because a) there were no lineups, b) their non-frozen supply chain meant they had to sell meat or it would rot, c) they were owned by people with families in the neighbourhood/city, and d) the higher prices kept out hoarders, panic buyers, and the mentally ill. On the last point, there was almost always some psycho causing problems in the regular supermarket because it appealed to their sense of drama and got them attention. The extra %15-20 was worth avoiding the risk of an altercation. The contempt some people have for local shopowners who provide services that are actually worth a premium is shocking, albeit typically british.
  - ytwySXpMbS 6y ago
    Not addressing your main points, but that is a seriously prejudiced view of people struggling with mental illness. Mentally ill people aren’t “psychos”, many people in all walks of life struggle with anxiety, depression or something else. That’s not to say violent people don’t have underlying mental health issues. It’s quite an outdated view that mentally ill people are distinct from “normal” people, and aren’t just people who’ve suffered trauma. What happens if you find yourself dealing with these issues, are you going to shame yourself into not seeking treatment?
    - motohagiography 6y ago
      During a public emergency with uncertainty like the beginning of the pandemic, a person who becomes physically aggressive in a supermarket, makes a point of coughing and spitting on shelves and aisles, and threatens the cashiers and stock staff everyone else depends on, because they want to provoke a confrontation that makes them feel powerful - does not earn sympathy. Equating people experiencing depression with those who have violent delusions and borderline tendencies creates a worse stigma on seeking treatment than recognizing that dangerous people are just plain dangerous. Sure, we're all people etc, but in an emergency, there are men and women you can trust, and there are ones you can't. A psycho is someone who threatens or harms others for gratification, and it is an epithet they earn. If that's "prejudiced," perhaps we're just from different cultures. The stakes change when there was a reasonable threat that their actions could put people and their families at risk.
Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
The chance of transmission in a small, quiet deli is significantly less than in a crowded supermarket. Several older residents in our town have switched from the Co-op to the local deli for exactly that reason. Unless you’re going to start deeming what food is essential and what isn’t, then your distinction is counter-productive.
gorgoiler 6y ago
Am I right in saying that the goal of any lockdown is not to completely stop the spread of the virus, but to instead merely keep hospitals from filling up? The health of the population, in general, is not the primary concern. We just need to stop the hospitals from collapsing. We live with all manner of sickness and disease every day of the year without trying to eradicate them. Covid is only different from heart disease, lung cancer, and rabies in that it has the potential to swamp us. Adjusting the throttle for spread might mean jewelry shops being open but sandwich shops being closed. It might just as well involve lockdown for anyone born in an odd month, or with a name ending in a vowel, or ginger hair. The measures are arbitrary and only used as a throttle for the inevitable spread. This is how I sleep at night. The alternative is the worrying thought that no one in power really knows what they are doing.
- graeme 6y ago
  Lockdown had a variety of goals but the current situation can generally be classed as a policy failure. Hospital collapse is the worst case scenario but isn’t the only goal. Other important goals include: * keeping schools open (mostly a success) * avoiding economic disruption (mixed, tending towards failure) * avoiding unnecessary deaths and long run health issues (failure) * Avoiding a second lockdown and the related uncertainty and stress (failure) * returning to normal life (failure) * avoiding dangerous mutations (failure) The UK is an island and could have fairly easily done a NZ/Australia strategy over the summer when seasonality made elimination easy. Jurisdictions that made that choice are doing better on all front. I live in one such jurisdiction (atlantic canada) and we’ve spent less time in lockdown, had a good economy, and mostly avoided deaths and hospitalizations. Seems a clear winner. Perhaps a country in the middle of europe couldn’t have done it but the Uk certainly could have. And no, this pretty clearly shows govts had no long run or even medium run strategy. Europe will be in rolling lockdowns till april or so, because of a premature declaration of victory in the summer.
  - tibbydudeza 6y ago
    It is way easier to leave the UK than it is to leave Australia/NZ - there are only the airways and no roads or ferries.
Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
> I mean, sure they sell food, but really - I'm unsure how vital to survival artisanal cheese and pasta is! I suppose we could close all food shops other than Asda, and restrict Asda to selling only their most basic range (and no sweets, chocolate, fizzy drinks, etc- after all, you can survive without those). On the other hand, that would mean that Asda would be more crowded as people who normally shop in your "chi-chi local middle class deli" now have to go there.

jkinudsjknds 6y ago

I don't know if I agree that a restaurant selling artisinal cheeses should be held to different standards than the lowest common denominator of nutrient gruel restauranteers.

adwww 6y ago

Re the deli and other quasi essential shops, it would seem unfair if they closed when you can still buy your fancy cheese and olives in a supermarket.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
I don't know why you expect it to be fair. The policy needs to be effective first and foremost. Schemes like furlough are there to support people who are most affected.
LatteLazy 6y ago
The issue isn't really whether that shop is essential. The issue is that the greeting card store next door is also open, because they've decided they're essential. And none of these stores (including the super market) is enforcing mask requirements because none of the others are and they don't want to be the only one. In 1000 little steps you are suddenly miles away from a real lockdown. You're basically BAU, but the pub is shut ever other week (unless you buy a scotch egg in which case it is also essential). I don't care if people are eating gourmet olives. But we need to realise that making excuses for doing nothing is still doing nothing.
- Izkata 6y ago
  It's essential to the owners or their employees, who may risk losing their home if they can't make a living. Lockdowns have gone on long enough that people are deciding to risk it because they have far more pressing concerns.

jmnicolas 6y ago

> UK-dwellers' sense of entitlement to 'freedoms' Seriously? We (the West, I'm not from the UK) are losing our freedom at an unimaginable speed even a few years ago and you think freedom is negotiable? I find this appalling how easy we ease into a dictatorship everywhere in Europe.

LatteLazy 6y ago
It's interesting that no one seems to give a shit about real freedoms like free speech or democracy, detention without trial or access to lawyers. But when you close the pubs (or the artisnal pasta makers), suddenly we're on a dictatorship.
- detritus 6y ago
  Hence my enclosing Freedoms in single quotes. I tend to communicate quite drily - that's often hard to put across online.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I think you're exactly correct. It drives me nuts when people talk about freedom, they have no actual idea what freedom is or takes and their actions undermine it. Freedom doesn't mean "I can do whatever I like with no consequences", but that's what people really want. Freedom is just a better sounding word than selfishness these days :( <Steps-down-from-soapbox>
    - carlmr 6y ago
      >Freedom doesn't mean "I can do whatever I like with no consequences" Depends on your definition of freedom. The issue with this kind of freedom is that your freedom encroaches on other people's freedoms, so most societies agreed that we should have less freedom in favor of fairness. Exactly where the trade-off is to be made is subjective and cannot be derived from facts alone. We have a lot of freedoms that encroach on other people's freedoms, it's impossibly to make a clear cut on where fair ends and personal freedom begins. Allowing people the freedom to sell sugar will inevitably lead to more diabetes and earlier death. It tastes good and it's addictive. Sugar costs a lot of people some of their freedom to live and move. But if we didn't allow selling sugar we would take away the seller's freedom and the freedom to choose from the consumer.

shalmanese 6y ago

> I was bemused by the very chi-chi local middle class deli near my home insisting they'd be staying open when I enquired on Saturday evening. I mean, sure they sell food, but really - I'm unsure how vital to survival artisanal cheese and pasta is! Let's not repeat the mistakes of the first lockdown. If you close down too many places, all that causes is everyone cramming into the same few places still open, causing superspreader events. At one point, LA shut down outdoor farmers markets and many cities including London slashed their public transit schedules, leading to overpacked busses and trains.

motohagiography 6y ago
In the march/april stage of the pandemic, I chose to shop at such "shi-shi" places exclusively because a) there were no lineups, b) their non-frozen supply chain meant they had to sell meat or it would rot, c) they were owned by people with families in the neighbourhood/city, and d) the higher prices kept out hoarders, panic buyers, and the mentally ill. On the last point, there was almost always some psycho causing problems in the regular supermarket because it appealed to their sense of drama and got them attention. The extra %15-20 was worth avoiding the risk of an altercation. The contempt some people have for local shopowners who provide services that are actually worth a premium is shocking, albeit typically british.
- ytwySXpMbS 6y ago
  Not addressing your main points, but that is a seriously prejudiced view of people struggling with mental illness. Mentally ill people aren’t “psychos”, many people in all walks of life struggle with anxiety, depression or something else. That’s not to say violent people don’t have underlying mental health issues. It’s quite an outdated view that mentally ill people are distinct from “normal” people, and aren’t just people who’ve suffered trauma. What happens if you find yourself dealing with these issues, are you going to shame yourself into not seeking treatment?
  - motohagiography 6y ago
    During a public emergency with uncertainty like the beginning of the pandemic, a person who becomes physically aggressive in a supermarket, makes a point of coughing and spitting on shelves and aisles, and threatens the cashiers and stock staff everyone else depends on, because they want to provoke a confrontation that makes them feel powerful - does not earn sympathy. Equating people experiencing depression with those who have violent delusions and borderline tendencies creates a worse stigma on seeking treatment than recognizing that dangerous people are just plain dangerous. Sure, we're all people etc, but in an emergency, there are men and women you can trust, and there are ones you can't. A psycho is someone who threatens or harms others for gratification, and it is an epithet they earn. If that's "prejudiced," perhaps we're just from different cultures. The stakes change when there was a reasonable threat that their actions could put people and their families at risk.

Doctor_Fegg 6y ago

The chance of transmission in a small, quiet deli is significantly less than in a crowded supermarket. Several older residents in our town have switched from the Co-op to the local deli for exactly that reason. Unless you’re going to start deeming what food is essential and what isn’t, then your distinction is counter-productive.

gorgoiler 6y ago

Am I right in saying that the goal of any lockdown is not to completely stop the spread of the virus, but to instead merely keep hospitals from filling up? The health of the population, in general, is not the primary concern. We just need to stop the hospitals from collapsing. We live with all manner of sickness and disease every day of the year without trying to eradicate them. Covid is only different from heart disease, lung cancer, and rabies in that it has the potential to swamp us. Adjusting the throttle for spread might mean jewelry shops being open but sandwich shops being closed. It might just as well involve lockdown for anyone born in an odd month, or with a name ending in a vowel, or ginger hair. The measures are arbitrary and only used as a throttle for the inevitable spread. This is how I sleep at night. The alternative is the worrying thought that no one in power really knows what they are doing.

graeme 6y ago
Lockdown had a variety of goals but the current situation can generally be classed as a policy failure. Hospital collapse is the worst case scenario but isn’t the only goal. Other important goals include: * keeping schools open (mostly a success) * avoiding economic disruption (mixed, tending towards failure) * avoiding unnecessary deaths and long run health issues (failure) * Avoiding a second lockdown and the related uncertainty and stress (failure) * returning to normal life (failure) * avoiding dangerous mutations (failure) The UK is an island and could have fairly easily done a NZ/Australia strategy over the summer when seasonality made elimination easy. Jurisdictions that made that choice are doing better on all front. I live in one such jurisdiction (atlantic canada) and we’ve spent less time in lockdown, had a good economy, and mostly avoided deaths and hospitalizations. Seems a clear winner. Perhaps a country in the middle of europe couldn’t have done it but the Uk certainly could have. And no, this pretty clearly shows govts had no long run or even medium run strategy. Europe will be in rolling lockdowns till april or so, because of a premature declaration of victory in the summer.
- tibbydudeza 6y ago
  It is way easier to leave the UK than it is to leave Australia/NZ - there are only the airways and no roads or ferries.

Ichthypresbyter 6y ago

> I mean, sure they sell food, but really - I'm unsure how vital to survival artisanal cheese and pasta is! I suppose we could close all food shops other than Asda, and restrict Asda to selling only their most basic range (and no sweets, chocolate, fizzy drinks, etc- after all, you can survive without those). On the other hand, that would mean that Asda would be more crowded as people who normally shop in your "chi-chi local middle class deli" now have to go there.