A majority of entertainers now-a-days don't work in theatres, they work in clubs/bars and private venues (birthday's weddings etc...)
- News all the latest
- Theme Park explore the park
- Resort tour the resort
- Future looking forward
- History looking back
- Community and meetups
-
ℹ️ Heads up...
This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks. - Thread starter Jb85
- Start date
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala (PortAventura Park)
- Favourite Ride
- Steel Vengeance
- Favourite Ride
- Zadra
Coronavirus
A majority of entertainers now-a-days don't work in theatres, they work in clubs/bars and private venues (birthday's weddings etc...)
jon81uk
TS Member
and the clubs and bars are now going ahead. From the 15th of August they were permitted (unless of course local lockdown comes in) so they are permitted. I live in London and know of multiple shows in pub type venues that have taken place in the last few weeks. Its the large scale theatres that aren't really opening up even though they are permitted, as its easier to distance with a one person on a stage thing compared to a full show.
Taken from gov website
A lot of my friends have lost a lot of work as a result of this pandemic and many venues are not hiring entertainers. Also many cooperate events that usually book entertainers are not happening due to the pandemic.
What is allowed and what is actually happening are two different things.
That is an argument that even the experts couldn't agree on until recently. However the recent figures have now laid that argument to rest, it is now officially confirmed that the figures are rising and has nothing to do with the amount of testing. This is not scaremongering and even if it is not affecting the fit and young, what happening in other countries have shown that this virus can make it way beyond the fit and young to the old and those with underlying health conditions.
Maybe I'm just taking all this too seriously or I'm just simply not got my head stuck in the sand?
I don’t think a sudden increase means there are more cases just more detected cases.
Testing in the last few days has been moved to areas of higher infection rates so it stands to reason there will be more cases detected, that’s why all the complaints about not been able to get a test in low infection areas like has been the case.
Testing in the last few days has been moved to areas of higher infection rates so it stands to reason there will be more cases detected, that’s why all the complaints about not been able to get a test in low infection areas like has been the case.
Matt N
TS Member
I know I heard on the radio on Thursday that some people were driving 100 miles to get COVID tests. I think the government really has centred a lot of their testing facilities on the areas with high rates, which is at least partially why the amount of positive tests has increased.
If you’re focusing almost exclusively upon areas with higher rates then you’re naturally going to find more cases, and a greater proportion of positive tests. I’m not saying that the rate hasn’t increased countrywide, but the government seemingly giving near exclusivity of the testing facilities to areas with high rates (e.g. numerous parts of the North) does seem like at least a partial explanation as to why cases and rates have gone up.
If you’re focusing almost exclusively upon areas with higher rates then you’re naturally going to find more cases, and a greater proportion of positive tests. I’m not saying that the rate hasn’t increased countrywide, but the government seemingly giving near exclusivity of the testing facilities to areas with high rates (e.g. numerous parts of the North) does seem like at least a partial explanation as to why cases and rates have gone up.
jon81uk
TS Member
You originally mentioned about places that aren’t allowed to open, whereas most can because of government rules but are choosing not to due to other factors such as it being commercially viable to open. Of course some bars/restaurants would be in the same state too where with distancing they can’t fit enough people in to be worth opening.
The corporate event issue is affecting a lot of places of course and people out of work is definitely an issue across the entertainment industry, I have several friends out of work who normally work back of house in theatres and are now redundant.
Rob
TS Team
I don't think anyone is panicking, merely highlighting concerns over the recent trend. It does seem that much of the spread is between younger people and their disregard for social distancing in areas where infection rates were already higher. Although I did see it reported yesterday that the rises were see across the country and not just in the hot spots.
Let's also not forget that in other countries such as France or Spain, the virus started spreading more among younger people initially but not it has spread to more vulnerable populations with an increase in hospital admissions and intensive care beds being occupied.
There is no need to panic, but I do think a fair amount of people think that this virus has gone away which it has not. Mixed messaging from the government clearly does not help but I do think there is a need for some caution as we approach the winter months. We saw earlier in the year just how quickly the virus can spread under normal life conditions; Christmas could be even more miserable than it is already likely to be if we lose control again.
I will be interested to see what the ONS study reveals over the next few Fridays as I do feel that it is a better indication of community transmission across the country. So far it has not shown an increase in infections but there is a time lag with it.
I were referring to business that hadn't been allowed to reopen due to being in local lock down as oppose to nationally, I thought that I just clarify that.
D4n
TS Member
Hancock's attack on young people was not the way to go.
The government pushed its eat out to help out scheme and the population went along with it (the young disproportionately so). Pubs were packed over the past four weeks. This is the most significant factor in the rise in cases.
Yet the government blames the young as a scapegoat for their own policy. Indeed, they refuse to admit that the scheme was ill judged and have even made noises suggesting that they may repeat it.
Couldn't make it up, honestly.
The government pushed its eat out to help out scheme and the population went along with it (the young disproportionately so). Pubs were packed over the past four weeks. This is the most significant factor in the rise in cases.
Yet the government blames the young as a scapegoat for their own policy. Indeed, they refuse to admit that the scheme was ill judged and have even made noises suggesting that they may repeat it.
Couldn't make it up, honestly.
Rojo
TS Member
Given the PCR flaws of not being able to distinguish between positive current infection and between shedding of dead virus cells many months later, I do wonder how many positive tests are in that regard "false positives"?
I don't think it's time to panic but it's definitely time to be cautious. We might need to monitor the next few weeks to see if the trend increases hospital and death admissions rise. Although we're confident that dexamethasone and other drugs are able to cut the death rate and things are more covid safe we shouldn't be caught with our trousers round our ankles like we did in March.
The yoof are no more to blame than the elderly, regardless of age the lack of compliance to the rules has become more evident in my very limited circle of friends and I suspect it's the same in the wider communities. It's hard to expect people not to interact outside their bubbles when they can mingle in pubs with bigger crowds.
I'm thinking the expected announcements regarding the vaccines will be used to bring people back into line over the winter. Scenario 1 - We have a vaccine but it won't be public until next year we need people to be vigilant until the vaccine is in the wild. Scenario 2 -we still don't have a vaccine, we need people to be vigilant until we can identify a working vaccine hopefully next year.
I don't think it's time to panic but it's definitely time to be cautious. We might need to monitor the next few weeks to see if the trend increases hospital and death admissions rise. Although we're confident that dexamethasone and other drugs are able to cut the death rate and things are more covid safe we shouldn't be caught with our trousers round our ankles like we did in March.
The yoof are no more to blame than the elderly, regardless of age the lack of compliance to the rules has become more evident in my very limited circle of friends and I suspect it's the same in the wider communities. It's hard to expect people not to interact outside their bubbles when they can mingle in pubs with bigger crowds.
I'm thinking the expected announcements regarding the vaccines will be used to bring people back into line over the winter. Scenario 1 - We have a vaccine but it won't be public until next year we need people to be vigilant until the vaccine is in the wild. Scenario 2 -we still don't have a vaccine, we need people to be vigilant until we can identify a working vaccine hopefully next year.
Agreed, using emotive terms as don't kill Granny (I assume Grandad can't catch Covid then?) is not the way to engage with people. He is just basically treating people like children. What happens then is, people will behave like children. Matt Hancock is not fit for the role he's in coming out with quotes like that, especially after he is part of the government that encouraged these people to go out in the first place.
Only in the UK can the Government encourage everyone to go out and socialise, pay towards it (and the people that are most likely to go out and socialise are the young, especially after being denied their friendships and relationships for so long), then suggest that those very same people are Granny killers.
Also, the Government have a policy?
It seems to be bow down to what the baying mob on Twitter or Karen from Facebook wants in an effort to be popular.
Governments world wide now are caught between a rock and a hard place. We have the likes of New Zealand that have effectively shut their borders and are pretty much banking on Covid being elimated by use of a vaccine. If not, as soon as they reopen then it will run rampant through a population that has pretty much 0 herd immunity. They are effectively delaying the inevitable.
Other countries had some quite strict lockdowns and are now back to where they started in terms of daily infections, though death rates are still very subdued. But we, and other countries can't afford another lockdown. There is little appetite for it now amongst the general public, despite what the keyboard warriors like to portray. You can see this out and about on a daily basis, with talking to friends and work friends etc.
Social distancing started to break down mid June, and it was inevitable, as it is simply an unatural thing for anyone to do on a long term basis. Even us introverts like some close interactions at times and enjoy spending time out with a small group of people. Anyone expecting this to still continue in any form long term is in for a surprise.
I did read a few weeks ago about a doctor was asked why the Influenza season was pretty much none existant this winter just gone. The response was that one of the reasons (NOTE not the only reason, another being lack of socialising due to lockdown), becuase those who would of died of Influenza had already died of Covid instead.
jon81uk
TS Member
the scheme was fine. Go out, have a meal with a soft drink sat at a table with 3 other people.
Where the virus is spreading is groups of 10+ all meeting up in badly managed bars and house parties.
The vast majority of venues using the eat out scheme seated people at tables of no more than six and operated with waited service.
Most have done it correctly but some haven’t, I went into KFC last week and was truly shocked at the going on in there.
Jb85
TS Member
Surely the basic logic would be to calculate the number of positive tests vs number of tests taken as a percentage.That would give you a clear indication as to whether cases are on the rise again.
That's exactly how they have come to the conclusion that the figures are rising.
jon81uk
TS Member
was there large gatherings of people hanging around for hours? If not then even if the distancing wasn’t great it’s unlikely it was driving a huge spike in cases.
I agree that some places aren’t set up as well as they could be, but I don’t think any restaurants are really causing outbreaks among customers (staff would be a different issue).
Benzin
TS Member
Government telling everyone to go out, be social (and get back to the office you lazy buggers) and wonder why the numbers go up.
Deflection is a key word in this government. Hence going after the 20-29 bracket because:
A) Most likely to have taken advantage of the Eat Out scheme.
B) More likely to be working in a role that doesn't allow WFH.
C) Suits the Conservative target demographic of blaming kids who "have it easy" and "never lived through true hardship".
Modern Politics 101.
Deflection is a key word in this government. Hence going after the 20-29 bracket because:
A) Most likely to have taken advantage of the Eat Out scheme.
B) More likely to be working in a role that doesn't allow WFH.
C) Suits the Conservative target demographic of blaming kids who "have it easy" and "never lived through true hardship".
Modern Politics 101.