|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x
Meanwhile those in power continually shift the goalposts of when we can go "back to normal" while millions continue to believe them and dismiss anybody suggesting the ulterior motives of those with the power as smooth brained libertarians or conspiracy theorists. I'm not going to dispute anything else you wrote but I genuinely want to ask, what do you actually think these motives are? Can you give me some examples? I'm honestly happy to listen to them Essentially, it's not unreasonable for people to suggest that our governments (here and overseas) or mega corporations are using this crisis to make even more profit and gain even more power over civilians under the guise of "doing the right thing". I'm 100% on board with corporations being out to make profit and screw the little guy and self serving politicians acting for the benefit of their career vs the people they were elected to represent. BUT Can you explain to me the ulterior motive besides trying to read the room to gain re-election? "Will more people like me for having zero cases or will more people like me if I say the economy is more important?" That, to me, is the far more likely scenario as opposed to some nefarious well considered plot. For me, until you give me examples of ulterior motives (and the means by which they could achieve their motives with these stupid lockdowns) it's easier to believe that "leaders" are just bumbling idiots stumbling from one decision to the other trying to further their own careers. The longer this goes on, the less it appears to be about the interests of our national health and more about social conditioning, making people more compliant. Until you can provide some specific examples this train of thought is going to fall into the realms of conspiracy. You are taking about thousands of local, provincial/state and national governments around the world that have implemented some form of restrictions, of various political persuasions, democratic, authoritarian and everything in between. They all have the same, unified sinister goal the "control" us more, even if it means devastating their economies in the process? The day I see a freedom rally like in Sydney today that doesn't involve someone spouting absolute nonsense about vaccines I might start listening. There is absolutely an argument to be made that we shouldn't be resorting to lockdown at this stage as a solid percentage of the population should be vaccinated. Unfortunately that isn't the case and here we are. So grin, bear it until you get vaccinated. And if you don't get vaccinated when given the opportunity you are an ignorant selfish fool who belongs in the dark ages. Go fuck yourself. This is actually not true. In fact its the opposite. Australia's economy is going gangbusters- low unemployment, wages starting to rise. Oh BTW International tourism is in fact a net negative for Australia ie Australians spend more internationally than international tourists spend here. I'm obviously talking about whilst in lockdown or other hard restrictions. Thought that was pretty clear Enzo. It doesn't matter what happens to the economy whilst in lockdown does it? Sure mate that's what I said wasn't it. you claimed the "economy was being devasted". It isn't. Have you seen the debt we have? And debt that was climbing before covid. Also as for the unemployment rate, when you have a system that counts an hour a week as being employed, then of course employment rate are good. IMO this pandemic has shown how little job security and long-term, well paid fulltime work the majority of the population have. Debt only matters if you can't manage it or you use it to purchase depreciating assets. Interest rates are at historic lows making it the best time in history to manage debt. And the debt is being used on productive things so no worries about depreciating assets The system that counts unemployment is the same as it was before COVID. Nothings changed with the system. Unemployment is down below pre-Covid levels. Wages are on the way up, of course, as we don't have absurdly high level of overseas immigrant workers driving wages downward. Fact, BTW. If now is the best time in history to manage debt then will 'now' also extend to 60 years for what it will take to pay off the debt? Let's hope the next government can patch up this LNPs complete botching of asian trade or the next few generations will be absolutely crippled
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI agree with podiacide. Set a date that is reasonable for everyone to get their 2 doses and open up after. Don't want to be vaccinated? Run the risk.We grudgingly accept that about 1500 people will die every year in car accidents even though we try and limit that. That's an 'acceptable' price to pay for society to function with cars. (There's plenty of other examples.) With vaccines available and free there is no reason we can't accept that covid is endemic and get on with it. A doctor mate of mine was saying in the years to come you'll get your flu shot and your covid shot. Eventually they might even roll them into one. Yes but what exactly are you going to do when the COVID ill and dying front up at the local hospital. Turn them away and say bad luck, you're fault no go die somewhere else I have this fat guy with chest pain to treat, or the druggy who OD'd, or the mum with the crying 3 year old with the snotty nose? How do you think that scenario will play out with the victims and their families? What are you going to do? Treat them. Just like you treat victims of car accidents. Who said 'turn then away'? Any other questions? Treat them?.Like the UK is doing right now as I write by postponing other surgery because there are too many of them? Like that?Sure. questions? Yes I have some. When is this magical date you have in mind? What happens when there are millions who are not vaccinated by that date? Let it rip anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xBut tell me, how many sick and dead is "acceptable". Don't forget, many of the sick but not dead will end up with lifelong complications that will need managing. How many of those are "Acceptable"? I take it you didnt read the article I posted 50,000 dead from cancer, 20,000 dead from heart disease, 1000 from road accidents, 3000 from suicides and 700 from the flu types that wont have the same response when COVID goes. How many of those 700 deaths are acceptable that current measures arent indefinite? As I said, the bottom line of this pandemic is not to prevent people from getting it or dying from it. The bottom line was the risk of hospital systems being overrun and we simply arent seeing that in Australia We have systems in place that curb the trends of any outbreak and compliance levels unseen in other countries. Lockdown should be a last resort particularly as we have a vaccine which is something we didnt see last year The UK recorded 50000 daily infections and 40 deaths. There is no chance countries / regions like that are going to eliminate the virus. Contrast this with Indonesia with the classic 2% ratio with work to do. This virus is not going anywhere. Australia simply has to vaccinate and open up. Changing the sensationlist mentality is a good starting point The no acceptable amount of COVID and no acceptable amount of deaths will always be applicable given we cant vaccinate 100% of our population. But that is never the objective and given we are all mortal and dying of other things is a stupid one at that Cancer, heat disease and road deaths don't have simple solutions. Covid does: lockdown. That is the reality. Its not even a reality. Victoria were already under restrictions when the current outbreak occurred. Caps on household visits, dress code for indoors, and other venues not even given a chance to open up. They also went into lockdown immediately. Yet despite this the cases have grown during the restriction period and during the lockdown period. They are also likely to extend lockdown because they didnt have the specious reasoning element that the states with no activity had. This is the second time also they have had to extend a "snap lockdown" due to actual activity Lockdown isnt a solution. Its a template tool applied tokenistically and whatever the data shows is "proof" that it worked. The ease at which you dismiss significant economical, social and psychological impact shows that you arent willing to give this any amount of serious thought If you look at the 50,000 infections and 40 deaths in the UK its because they have vaccinated their most vulnerable. This is something we have known for 18 months. 4 deaths in NSW, all over the age of 70. Once your vulnerable is vaccinated the death rates plummet. And yes there are younger people in hospital and in ICU but hardly a concerning trend and definitely not one that is going to overrun hospital systems Last year Australia had let over 4500 infected people into the country and with a few restrictions in place and nothing more than a (I think they called it) stage 3 lockdown they were able to trend the numbers downwards. It was national, new, purposeful, uniform, and able to do its job Today we see 1 infected person let into the community and 2 weeks later there are over 100 local cases in a single day. And this is despite a stage 4.5 lockdown. This is a complex social problem and I'm not sure how much you are trolling when you say there is a simple solution, and the answer is lockdown. Particularly when there are places that have far more knowledge and resources than we do but have battled with the same problem If it is possible for one person to encounter another than the virus will spread. A lockdown is not an isolation order and an isolation order can only be enforced with limited resources for specific key contacts. Australia had a working suppression model that gave the best balance of life and infection. And today it has a vaccine which mitigates the risk of the dying part. Opening up internally and opening up externally are two different things and there is no reason we couldnt open up internally given quarantine, testing, isolation and social distancing mandates Lockdown is the problem and the only people who cant see that are the people who have kept their jobs and have a stable household full of caring people What are you on? You want to "open internally"? Victoria's current lockdown was caused by delivery drivers from Sydney not observing the travel restriction protocols. Open internally so that the virus can spread from NSW to all the country like it did to Victoria? It is indisputable that lockdowns work to stop COVID illness and death. You'd know that if we didn't have them. I'm not sure how any serious-minded adult could argue otherwise. Of course lockdowns work. Its indisputable. The argument now is simply how to balance the economics with the spread of the virus, and obviously the vaccine *and* treatment is a big part of that. Setting a date and sticking to it for letting it rip is a disaster waiting to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x
Meanwhile those in power continually shift the goalposts of when we can go "back to normal" while millions continue to believe them and dismiss anybody suggesting the ulterior motives of those with the power as smooth brained libertarians or conspiracy theorists. I'm not going to dispute anything else you wrote but I genuinely want to ask, what do you actually think these motives are? Can you give me some examples? I'm honestly happy to listen to them Essentially, it's not unreasonable for people to suggest that our governments (here and overseas) or mega corporations are using this crisis to make even more profit and gain even more power over civilians under the guise of "doing the right thing". I'm 100% on board with corporations being out to make profit and screw the little guy and self serving politicians acting for the benefit of their career vs the people they were elected to represent. BUT Can you explain to me the ulterior motive besides trying to read the room to gain re-election? "Will more people like me for having zero cases or will more people like me if I say the economy is more important?" That, to me, is the far more likely scenario as opposed to some nefarious well considered plot. For me, until you give me examples of ulterior motives (and the means by which they could achieve their motives with these stupid lockdowns) it's easier to believe that "leaders" are just bumbling idiots stumbling from one decision to the other trying to further their own careers. The longer this goes on, the less it appears to be about the interests of our national health and more about social conditioning, making people more compliant. Until you can provide some specific examples this train of thought is going to fall into the realms of conspiracy. You are taking about thousands of local, provincial/state and national governments around the world that have implemented some form of restrictions, of various political persuasions, democratic, authoritarian and everything in between. They all have the same, unified sinister goal the "control" us more, even if it means devastating their economies in the process? The day I see a freedom rally like in Sydney today that doesn't involve someone spouting absolute nonsense about vaccines I might start listening. There is absolutely an argument to be made that we shouldn't be resorting to lockdown at this stage as a solid percentage of the population should be vaccinated. Unfortunately that isn't the case and here we are. So grin, bear it until you get vaccinated. And if you don't get vaccinated when given the opportunity you are an ignorant selfish fool who belongs in the dark ages. Go fuck yourself. This is actually not true. In fact its the opposite. Australia's economy is going gangbusters- low unemployment, wages starting to rise. Oh BTW International tourism is in fact a net negative for Australia ie Australians spend more internationally than international tourists spend here. I'm obviously talking about whilst in lockdown or other hard restrictions. Thought that was pretty clear Enzo. It doesn't matter what happens to the economy whilst in lockdown does it? Sure mate that's what I said wasn't it. you claimed the "economy was being devasted". It isn't. Have you seen the debt we have? And debt that was climbing before covid. Also as for the unemployment rate, when you have a system that counts an hour a week as being employed, then of course employment rate are good. IMO this pandemic has shown how little job security and long-term, well paid fulltime work the majority of the population have. Debt only matters if you can't manage it or you use it to purchase depreciating assets. Interest rates are at historic lows making it the best time in history to manage debt. And the debt is being used on productive things so no worries about depreciating assets The system that counts unemployment is the same as it was before COVID. Nothings changed with the system. Unemployment is down below pre-Covid levels. Wages are on the way up, of course, as we don't have absurdly high level of overseas immigrant workers driving wages downward. Fact, BTW. If now is the best time in history to manage debt then will 'now' also extend to 60 years for what it will take to pay off the debt? Let's hope the next government can patch up this LNPs complete botching of asian trade or the next few generations will be absolutely crippled I doubt it. Been hearing that for 30 years of my working life. "Australia is cooked". "Banana republic blah blah". And here we are the richest per capita in the world. ebven if we were the tenth richest we'd still be doing OK.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
I wonder if the low COVID death numbers coming out of the UK are accurate. We all know people dying with COVID were counted as people dying from COVID to exaggerate the COVID pandemic death rate when it was politically-expedient to do so. One wonders now the poltiicans want to open up if that way of keeping score has been changed.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xBut tell me, how many sick and dead is "acceptable". Don't forget, many of the sick but not dead will end up with lifelong complications that will need managing. How many of those are "Acceptable"? I take it you didnt read the article I posted 50,000 dead from cancer, 20,000 dead from heart disease, 1000 from road accidents, 3000 from suicides and 700 from the flu types that wont have the same response when COVID goes. How many of those 700 deaths are acceptable that current measures arent indefinite? As I said, the bottom line of this pandemic is not to prevent people from getting it or dying from it. The bottom line was the risk of hospital systems being overrun and we simply arent seeing that in Australia We have systems in place that curb the trends of any outbreak and compliance levels unseen in other countries. Lockdown should be a last resort particularly as we have a vaccine which is something we didnt see last year The UK recorded 50000 daily infections and 40 deaths. There is no chance countries / regions like that are going to eliminate the virus. Contrast this with Indonesia with the classic 2% ratio with work to do. This virus is not going anywhere. Australia simply has to vaccinate and open up. Changing the sensationlist mentality is a good starting point The no acceptable amount of COVID and no acceptable amount of deaths will always be applicable given we cant vaccinate 100% of our population. But that is never the objective and given we are all mortal and dying of other things is a stupid one at that Cancer, heat disease and road deaths don't have simple solutions. Covid does: lockdown. That is the reality. Its not even a reality. Victoria were already under restrictions when the current outbreak occurred. Caps on household visits, dress code for indoors, and other venues not even given a chance to open up. They also went into lockdown immediately. Yet despite this the cases have grown during the restriction period and during the lockdown period. They are also likely to extend lockdown because they didnt have the specious reasoning element that the states with no activity had. This is the second time also they have had to extend a "snap lockdown" due to actual activity Lockdown isnt a solution. Its a template tool applied tokenistically and whatever the data shows is "proof" that it worked. The ease at which you dismiss significant economical, social and psychological impact shows that you arent willing to give this any amount of serious thought If you look at the 50,000 infections and 40 deaths in the UK its because they have vaccinated their most vulnerable. This is something we have known for 18 months. 4 deaths in NSW, all over the age of 70. Once your vulnerable is vaccinated the death rates plummet. And yes there are younger people in hospital and in ICU but hardly a concerning trend and definitely not one that is going to overrun hospital systems Last year Australia had let over 4500 infected people into the country and with a few restrictions in place and nothing more than a (I think they called it) stage 3 lockdown they were able to trend the numbers downwards. It was national, new, purposeful, uniform, and able to do its job Today we see 1 infected person let into the community and 2 weeks later there are over 100 local cases in a single day. And this is despite a stage 4.5 lockdown. This is a complex social problem and I'm not sure how much you are trolling when you say there is a simple solution, and the answer is lockdown. Particularly when there are places that have far more knowledge and resources than we do but have battled with the same problem If it is possible for one person to encounter another than the virus will spread. A lockdown is not an isolation order and an isolation order can only be enforced with limited resources for specific key contacts. Australia had a working suppression model that gave the best balance of life and infection. And today it has a vaccine which mitigates the risk of the dying part. Opening up internally and opening up externally are two different things and there is no reason we couldnt open up internally given quarantine, testing, isolation and social distancing mandates Lockdown is the problem and the only people who cant see that are the people who have kept their jobs and have a stable household full of caring people What are you on? You want to "open internally"? Victoria's current lockdown was caused by delivery drivers from Sydney not observing the travel restriction protocols. Open internally so that the virus can spread from NSW to all the country like it did to Victoria? It is indisputable that lockdowns work to stop COVID illness and death. You'd know that if we didn't have them. I'm not sure how any serious-minded adult could argue otherwise. Of course lockdowns work. Its indisputable. The argument now is simply how to balance the economics with the spread of the virus, and obviously the vaccine *and* treatment is a big part of that. Setting a date and sticking to it for letting it rip is a disaster waiting to happen. If there is a fly on the window you can get rid of it by using a mallet I'm not going to argue whether or not lockdowns work (98 cases in NSW today by the way) because you have obviously made your mind up. But surely you can understand there is more than one way to get the oranges up the stairs Australia already has quarantine. This stops 99.99% of infections. Something other countries dont have They also have social distancing regulations based on real science. Those markers on the floor in supermarkets arent for fun. They do make a difference which is why most sites being contact traced dont turn up a case, or why only 6 or 7 people at a school or work place get infected. Contrast this with 100% of people from a function or household They also have isolation orders to break down transmission, and testing with voluntary testing rates high Australia already has systems in place which are going to curb any outbreak. Add to that the vaccine which is new this year. We know with every case there is a 2 week period of potential exposure followed by a 2 week period of making sure. The notion of locking down or imposing restrictions 4 weeks for every infection is just stupid This is a balance. The cost of doing one thing vs the cost of the other. Not a one sided "the more you can pile on the better" argument or a "if we get 98 cases with lockdown then surely it would have been a thousand without" argument. The other thing is Australia wont even have its adult population vaccinated until the end of the year so there is another 6 months to go Australia has all the economic, social and psychological problems of the hardest hit countries without the viral activity. The early response made the most sense. Today it is satirical and without purpose. I'll pick up this arguement during the 6th Victorian lockdown because maybe you would have broken by then And to the bolded point. You answered your own rhetoric. Hotspot declarations and isolation orders are part of the current system. Opening up internally doesnt mean there are no hot spots or isolation orders so its not an outbreak that would have occurred within the rules under either system
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI agree with podiacide. Set a date that is reasonable for everyone to get their 2 doses and open up after. Don't want to be vaccinated? Run the risk.We grudgingly accept that about 1500 people will die every year in car accidents even though we try and limit that. That's an 'acceptable' price to pay for society to function with cars. (There's plenty of other examples.) With vaccines available and free there is no reason we can't accept that covid is endemic and get on with it. A doctor mate of mine was saying in the years to come you'll get your flu shot and your covid shot. Eventually they might even roll them into one. Yes but what exactly are you going to do when the COVID ill and dying front up at the local hospital. Turn them away and say bad luck, you're fault no go die somewhere else I have this fat guy with chest pain to treat, or the druggy who OD'd, or the mum with the crying 3 year old with the snotty nose? How do you think that scenario will play out with the victims and their families? What are you going to do? Treat them. Just like you treat victims of car accidents. Who said 'turn then away'? Any other questions? Treat them?.Like the UK is doing right now as I write by postponing other surgery because there are too many of them? Like that?Sure. questions? Yes I have some. When is this magical date you have in mind? What happens when there are millions who are not vaccinated by that date? Let it rip anyway? Can you not read? Set a date that is reasonable for everyone to get their 2 doses and open up after.
Because, don't forget, there is going to be a sizable number of people that refuse to be vaccinated. If that's only 5% of the population that's over a million people. Well we can't be locked up forever because those anti-science clowns can't be convinced to do the right thing. I'm no virologist so take this with a grain of salt. My opinion and I have no idea (as you'd know) but lets say we're going to open up 8 weeks after everyone has had their chance to be vaccinated. Long enough? Personally I would have a literal and figurative army of people going door to friggin' door in mobile vans and pop-up clinics everywhere as well as getting pharmacists and nurses (including army medics) to go to big workplaces. The rollout is glacial because 'Slomo' fucked up the orders but now Pfizer is arriving at a million doses a week there's simply no excuse. What's your suggestion? Indefinite lockdown and Australia cut off from the world forever? What's you proposed benchmark?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Must say I'm surprised by Enzo's 'leftard' opinions on government sanctioned denial of free movement. What interesting times we live in. As an adherent of the Gospel of Saint Alan Jones I would've expected the opposite.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
Surprise surprise, Victoria's snap lockdown will not be ending after 5 days
After clashing horns with the PM and declaring that 5 days and no more was all that was needed and pushing for changes to the pandemic payments, Victoria have opted for an extended lockdown because it didnt have the lack of viral activity other states had when they used a snap lockdown
Reinforces Enzos point about how "simple" the situation is and how a stage 4 lockdown with all bells and whistles is clearly the only "workable answer"
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
I try not to double post but I read something on the ABC feed about the SA premier encouraging people not to panic buy and it helps drive my point home
If you look at the psychology of panic buying you'll see how irrational and unusual behaviour can crawl into any social system when there is stress. As per my 4 guys in the lifeboat example above
Lockdown causes panic buying. It causes people to push people over, buy excessive amounts (depriving others), and turn into absolute ferals. The same people who are smiling at people the day before and helping old ladies cross the street
If you can understand lockdown or pending lockdown causes panic buying, then you can also understand why lockdown will also cause desperate people to visit family and friends during the lockdown period and contribute to the ever growing number of cases
We are currently giving people two doses of the vaccine. Why not 5 or 10? Why not vaccinate the elderly in half hour increments? Doing things in excess is sometimes worse than not doing things at all. A stage 4 lockdown with as many laws as possible that dont "violate human rights" is not the only thing that can create a downward trend on numbers. Not only that but it can also have the opposite impact (which contrary to popular belief we are seeing today)
|
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
Woman in her 50s found dead at home from covid in Sydney, damn.
|
|
|
|
|
sydneyfc1987
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWoman in her 50s found dead at home from covid in Sydney, damn. The mother of one of the fuckwit removalists that knew he had COVID and travelled through western NSW and to Victoria anyway. Talk about karma, not that the lady who died necessarily did anything wrong.
(VAR) IS NAVY BLUE
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
20 deaths for people under the age of 60 (2.2%), 894 for people aged over 60 (97.8%)
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
The ironic thing is that if conservative public figures go on now about the economy in glowing terms after what we have been through, in a way they are highlighting that their capitalist based, free enterprise system doesn't really work, because ironically it is government that was asked to save the day.
All the big boys in private sector ran with their caps out...so much for capitalism hey? They were all socialists when it suited them.
|
|
|
|
|
aussie pride
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Stats can be used to prove anything I'll give an example. If a school closes down due permanently to COVID you might have 30 staff unemployed. In parallel to this there might be a new construction project hiring 35 people. From a statistical point of view employment has risen But the quality of a full time teaching job at a teacher's salary is not comparable to short term project work at a lower rate. Plus those 30 staff still dont have a job and cant find work so its shifting things around It is undeniable the economy has been damaged as well as employment. Not to mention social, psychological, sport, family and other elements have been broken down. Thats what a pandemic does and anybody trying to use data to prove otherwise is either using flawed data or flawed interpretation With lower levels of international workers there may be a few more locals taking up these jobs accounting for some of the rise in employment but like I said, this is not quality and hardly a long term thing. When we open our shores up and welcome back international workers the damage will become clearer Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response. There was no weighing up the cost of A against other life metrics, and in most instances it was always financial cost instead of (for example) the cost of quality in person education or the ability to speak to somebody out of your household who isnt muffled behind a mask. Sadly everything will always be weighed up against the sensationalised hypothetical deaths and there will always be a sense that whatever we went through the alternative would have been worse
|
|
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. At the end of the day, lockdowns are not meant to last forever. As Muz said, we need a reasonable period of time for people to get vaccinated and move on. NSW is currently at around 3.1m shot out of the 10m (for the entire adult population). ABC reckons that with our vaccination rate, it won't be complete until mid-February 2022. We're probably going to ramp up our capability and there will also be those that don't want to get a shot, so I imagine the Government is thinking sometime before the end of the year is when people just need to make a call and say open up. In the meantime, I agree with Bluebird's statement that there are other social costs involved with lockdowns which need to be considered but simply opening up won't fix the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xAfter avoiding a few of the melb lockdowns while on holidays in NZ I drove back to Melbourne from Newcastle last sunday and here I am stuck in another lockdown. Living by myself and having been made redundant it sucks beyond belief. But with low vaccination rates I understand why they went hard and fast here with the delta strain. For me, these lockdowns are almost a sideshow to the big decision which will shape our society and our politics for the next 12 months or longer: At what percentage of the population vaccinated do you open up society and borders? This decision will tear friends and families and political parties apart. Some want to reopen right now, some will want to be closed together. People are scared, emotional, exhausted and over it - not a right mind to make decisions of life and death. And this is a matter of life and death because herd immunity does not exist on vaccination alone (for delta most mathematical epidemiologists say you need 97.0% vaccination rate of everyone including kids). When we open up there will be a substantial exit wave of cases and deaths - more than Australia has experienced before but overwhelmingly most of those cases will be in people who decided not to get vaccinated. There will be a lot of commercial pressure to open up - businesses want cheaper labour, then you have tourism and education reliant on overseas visitors and students) and their will be a lot of aussies wanting to get o/s for a variety of legitimate reasons. On the other hand, it will be very easy for the media to project fears of opening up - asking politicians and the like (what if it was your grandmother?) and medical experts like Norman Swan et al painting worrying scenarios of hospitals overwhelmed. In the meantime the rest of the world gets on with their lives and we will feel incredibly frustrated. Like many on here, I support the view that once everyone has access to the vaccines we then set a date to open up and we prepare as best we can and we follow through. That could even be by mid next year in a best case scenario. But thats the best case scenario, worst case is that we get bogged down in these arguments and endlessly kick the can down the road while tearing each other apart. I enjoyed my time in NZ just because I didnt need to think about this issue. I'm now thinking of how I could move to another country for 12 months just to avoid these arguments and somehow make enough money to feed myself while Australia (and NZ) has this emotionally wrenching argument. (honestly, anyone have any ideas of where I could go). People talk about personal risk and population risk and these are all complex factors. When you've had covid in your community at high levels like the rest of the world, getting cases and deaths down to low levels make you more tolerant of risk and the extra burdens of getting to elimination dont seem worth the social, economic and personal pain. When covid cases and deaths have been very low for a long time, personally and at population level we view those cases and deaths as avoidable and unnecessary. Morrison and Hunt have really used this cognitive bias to take attention away from their vaccine rollout stuffups - pointing to 50 deaths a day in England when the english people seem perfectly fine with that death rate as long as they can have their freedoms back. The media has also assisted in this gaslighting of our personal risk perceptions. Anyway, thats just my rant. I'd be interested in how you think this will practically play out. We will be vaccinating over a million doses per week from next week and we should get to about 70% first dose by end of Sept. So this argument will become big very soon. Albanese did a press conference this week about opening up but was extremely coy about setting targets, dates etc. SCOMO says he is still waiting on Doherty institute modelling and that his decision will be driven by science not politics which is absolute bullshit - this is a decision on risk and reward, there is no pure right or wrong answer - its how many cases and deaths are you willing to put up with. Personally I cant ever see all the state premiers agreeing on a vaccination number or date - what happens if some hold out - will they permanently close their state borders, will it be a constitutional crisis? Oh and we have a federal election between October and May 2021. Interesting times. Excellent post. As you say we are balancing health and economics. Lets dig deeper. On the economics side of it, you rightly point out, we really mean four things: people wanting and some needing to travel overseas, tourism which is a net negative for Australia and is on a global level one of the most environmentally-destructive human activity , cheap overseas labour that drives local wage downward, and the tertiary education sector drunk on overseas student money with their $million dollar salary Chancellors, declining education standards and a backdoor to permanent residency for overseas students. Of those four. the need-not want- to go overseas is the only one that I might think is worth a risk my life for the overall good of the country True. If we didnt have low interest rates and a state and fed government's willing and able to borrow like crazy then I could see the loss of international students devastating Melbourne. I was teaching part time as Melb uni pre-covid and 90% of my students were paying those outrageous fees. If they dont have international students back before Feb next year it will crunch a lot of businesses in melb that catered to that. Good thing is that rents in inner city are incredibly cheap if you can handle living here with inevitable cycle of lockdowns over winter.
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x@Podiacide. How will this play out? That will depend on the outcome of the UK's experiment that begins on the 19 July 2021. Yeah and now a few other european countries. UK with 88.1% of adults with first dose and because of high previous case rates they must be close to 95% immunity. They are clearly hoping to get to close to 100% as possible before winter and while school holidays are on. There will inevitably be a big increase in deaths but its all about whether the govt will hold its nerve or go back to restrictions. It will be fascinating. I could see Gladys and NSW using a successful UK opening up as reason for more tolerance for cases in Australia but not Victoria. This is what Brett Sutton said at the press conference yesterday: (I only have a screenshot, not the original link): " (when asked about UK) "Even in places with high vaccination coverage, deaths are decreasing and hospitalisations are decreasing but they still have 50000 cases and the 'exit wave' will have 50 deaths a day. We need to extinguish the variant" He basically said yesterday that Victoria will have severe restrictions or lockdowns until mass vaccination. I'm getting out of Victoria, just figuring out if I should go all the way to overseas.
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI agree with podiacide. Set a date that is reasonable for everyone to get their 2 doses and open up after. Don't want to be vaccinated? Run the risk.We grudgingly accept that about 1500 people will die every year in car accidents even though we try and limit that. That's an 'acceptable' price to pay for society to function with cars. (There's plenty of other examples.) With vaccines available and free there is no reason we can't accept that covid is endemic and get on with it. A doctor mate of mine was saying in the years to come you'll get your flu shot and your covid shot. Eventually they might even roll them into one. Yes but what exactly are you going to do when the COVID ill and dying front up at the local hospital. Turn them away and say bad luck, you're fault no go die somewhere else I have this fat guy with chest pain to treat, or the druggy who OD'd, or the mum with the crying 3 year old with the snotty nose? How do you think that scenario will play out with the victims and their families? It cant play out thats why Australia is fucked. Its so easy for media to run stories like this and appeal to government's humanity because. Now if it was the UK or any other country that has been having high death rates, the public and the govt would put deaths here and there into perspective especially if it is in unvaccinated people. But that is just so much harder to do when you've chased covid zero deaths.
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Stats can be used to prove anything I'll give an example. If a school closes down due permanently to COVID you might have 30 staff unemployed. In parallel to this there might be a new construction project hiring 35 people. From a statistical point of view employment has risen But the quality of a full time teaching job at a teacher's salary is not comparable to short term project work at a lower rate. Plus those 30 staff still dont have a job and cant find work so its shifting things around It is undeniable the economy has been damaged as well as employment. Not to mention social, psychological, sport, family and other elements have been broken down. Thats what a pandemic does and anybody trying to use data to prove otherwise is either using flawed data or flawed interpretation With lower levels of international workers there may be a few more locals taking up these jobs accounting for some of the rise in employment but like I said, this is not quality and hardly a long term thing. When we open our shores up and welcome back international workers the damage will become clearer Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response. There was no weighing up the cost of A against other life metrics, and in most instances it was always financial cost instead of (for example) the cost of quality in person education or the ability to speak to somebody out of your household who isnt muffled behind a mask. Sadly everything will always be weighed up against the sensationalised hypothetical deaths and there will always be a sense that whatever we went through the alternative would have been worse I have to agree with you on the point that Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response and this is the fatal flaw of having policies "driven by the science". Most scientists, especially the talking heads on our media, have secure jobs. They are not responsible for other aspects of managing society. It is the job of our political leaders who must balance all aspects of the effects of different policy responses. It outrages me when both SCOMO and Albo are asked about exit plans and the vax levels needed for opening up and they say "it wont be a political decision it will be a decision based on scientific/medical advice". Bullshit. THe numbers they are going to give the government will be too high to be practical. They will be attacked from both sides and they'll be quickly discarded. In my earlier rant I discussed the work of Adam Kucharski, one of the top mathematical epedemioligists in the world and how he estimates we need at least 97.0% of all people vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. Here is his twitter thread about it: https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1415587167863283713The goalposts will keep shifting. It will be a percentage of adults vaccinated then it will need to be a percentage of kids vaccinated (and it wont be till next year till vaccines for 12-16 yrs old will be approved - and ages for u/12). And then there will be a big % who never want to open up. As I said, this question will tear our society apart. I also agree with Enzo in the sense that lockdowns do work - as a medical response and if we didnt have lockdowns in sydney and melb now we would have a huge amount of deaths and cases. But lockdowns arent sustainable on any measure and the backlash will grow the more lockdowns we have and the more vaccinations we get. And compliance will decrease and people will get desperate and do desperate things. Because lockdowns are incredibly unequal on different segments of society. Different state premiers will have different tolerances meaning interstate borders will keep being open and closed. I dont see us settling on a national decision to open international borders for at least 12 months let alone implementing it.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
The fundamental problem with the zero tolerance to Covid shown by Aus Governments like Victoria is that vaccines dont stop all infection or deaths (ref below article). SO question is, even with high % of population vaccinated, if Covid starts spreading through the community and people get sick and die, will these governments go into lock down again? CDC says roughly 4,100 people have been hospitalized or died with Covid breakthrough infections after vaccination
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Stats can be used to prove anything I'll give an example. If a school closes down due permanently to COVID you might have 30 staff unemployed. In parallel to this there might be a new construction project hiring 35 people. From a statistical point of view employment has risen But the quality of a full time teaching job at a teacher's salary is not comparable to short term project work at a lower rate. Plus those 30 staff still dont have a job and cant find work so its shifting things around It is undeniable the economy has been damaged as well as employment. Not to mention social, psychological, sport, family and other elements have been broken down. Thats what a pandemic does and anybody trying to use data to prove otherwise is either using flawed data or flawed interpretation With lower levels of international workers there may be a few more locals taking up these jobs accounting for some of the rise in employment but like I said, this is not quality and hardly a long term thing. When we open our shores up and welcome back international workers the damage will become clearer Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response. There was no weighing up the cost of A against other life metrics, and in most instances it was always financial cost instead of (for example) the cost of quality in person education or the ability to speak to somebody out of your household who isnt muffled behind a mask. Sadly everything will always be weighed up against the sensationalised hypothetical deaths and there will always be a sense that whatever we went through the alternative would have been worse I have to agree with you on the point that Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response and this is the fatal flaw of having policies "driven by the science". Most scientists, especially the talking heads on our media, have secure jobs. They are not responsible for other aspects of managing society. It is the job of our political leaders who must balance all aspects of the effects of different policy responses. It outrages me when both SCOMO and Albo are asked about exit plans and the vax levels needed for opening up and they say "it wont be a political decision it will be a decision based on scientific/medical advice". Bullshit. THe numbers they are going to give the government will be too high to be practical. They will be attacked from both sides and they'll be quickly discarded. In my earlier rant I discussed the work of Adam Kucharski, one of the top mathematical epedemioligists in the world and how he estimates we need at least 97.0% of all people vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. Here is his twitter thread about it: https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1415587167863283713The goalposts will keep shifting. It will be a percentage of adults vaccinated then it will need to be a percentage of kids vaccinated (and it wont be till next year till vaccines for 12-16 yrs old will be approved - and ages for u/12). And then there will be a big % who never want to open up. As I said, this question will tear our society apart. Interesting question for you, how many of the "experts" providing advice to Aus governments have Pandemic Experience and so are qualified as experts? If the science is clear (ie black and white - unquestionable) why is the advice in Aus different to that in UK to that in Sweden to that in any number of different counties? (shit its even different in each state of Aus) In my personal life when I am not happy with what a doctor tells me, I get a second opinion from some one else, in the case of covid there is no second opinion allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible I agree with what you are saying and this is the rational course (of course it looks like up to 10 to 20% of over 60s will choose not to get vaccinated) but the scare campaigns write themselves and Australians are now addicted to fear when it comes to covid - not all but enough to derail any reopening campaign. I want to open up but I can see it being a big dirty emotional argument - fear is one of the strongest emotions. Pro lockdown will ask;
* what about vaccinating children (add at least another 6 to 12 months to vaccine rollout)
* what about long covid (latest research shows its extremely rare in kids; in adults it’s more common)
* the vaccines don’t stop all deaths (again they’ll skew things out of proportion)
*what about the chance of variants
* what if it was your grandma who is amongst the dead
I hear these arguments passionately made right now by scientifically literate and rational friends. A large part of Australian society has gaslighted themselves, we will look back on this time and this reluctance to open up as utter madness (opening after all people have had chance to be vaccinated)
Add all of this into a tightly contested federal election due by May 2022 and a federal government seeing state premier after state premier winning landslides based on fear campaigns and tight borders.
Maybe I’m being consumed by melb lockdown madness myself but I’m happy to hear others thoughts on how they think this will play out in next 6 to 12 months. Will ongoing lockdowns across the country while we watch US/UK/Canada/Europe open up lead us to pressure our politicians to ignore these “experts” fears and open up or will it reinforce the political winds and public fears to be closed for ages?
|
|
|
|
|
Podiacide
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 753,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Stats can be used to prove anything I'll give an example. If a school closes down due permanently to COVID you might have 30 staff unemployed. In parallel to this there might be a new construction project hiring 35 people. From a statistical point of view employment has risen But the quality of a full time teaching job at a teacher's salary is not comparable to short term project work at a lower rate. Plus those 30 staff still dont have a job and cant find work so its shifting things around It is undeniable the economy has been damaged as well as employment. Not to mention social, psychological, sport, family and other elements have been broken down. Thats what a pandemic does and anybody trying to use data to prove otherwise is either using flawed data or flawed interpretation With lower levels of international workers there may be a few more locals taking up these jobs accounting for some of the rise in employment but like I said, this is not quality and hardly a long term thing. When we open our shores up and welcome back international workers the damage will become clearer Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response. There was no weighing up the cost of A against other life metrics, and in most instances it was always financial cost instead of (for example) the cost of quality in person education or the ability to speak to somebody out of your household who isnt muffled behind a mask. Sadly everything will always be weighed up against the sensationalised hypothetical deaths and there will always be a sense that whatever we went through the alternative would have been worse I have to agree with you on the point that Australia had a health response instead of a pandemic response and this is the fatal flaw of having policies "driven by the science". Most scientists, especially the talking heads on our media, have secure jobs. They are not responsible for other aspects of managing society. It is the job of our political leaders who must balance all aspects of the effects of different policy responses. It outrages me when both SCOMO and Albo are asked about exit plans and the vax levels needed for opening up and they say "it wont be a political decision it will be a decision based on scientific/medical advice". Bullshit. THe numbers they are going to give the government will be too high to be practical. They will be attacked from both sides and they'll be quickly discarded. In my earlier rant I discussed the work of Adam Kucharski, one of the top mathematical epedemioligists in the world and how he estimates we need at least 97.0% of all people vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. Here is his twitter thread about it: https://twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1415587167863283713The goalposts will keep shifting. It will be a percentage of adults vaccinated then it will need to be a percentage of kids vaccinated (and it wont be till next year till vaccines for 12-16 yrs old will be approved - and ages for u/12). And then there will be a big % who never want to open up. As I said, this question will tear our society apart. Interesting question for you, how many of the "experts" providing advice to Aus governments have Pandemic Experience and so are qualified as experts? If the science is clear (ie black and white - unquestionable) why is the advice in Aus different to that in UK to that in Sweden to that in any number of different counties? (shit its even different in each state of Aus) In my personal life when I am not happy with what a doctor tells me, I get a second opinion from some one else, in the case of covid there is no second opinion allowed. On the subject of experts and expertise this was a good article: https://www.crikey.com.au/2021/07/14/not-all-experts-created-equal/
|
|
|
|
|
AJF
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 2
|
+x+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible Maybe I’m being consumed by melb lockdown madness myself but I’m happy to hear others thoughts on how they think this will play out in next 6 to 12 months. Will ongoing lockdowns across the country while we watch US/UK/Canada/Europe open up lead us to pressure our politicians to ignore these “experts” fears and open up or will it reinforce the political winds and public fears to be closed for ages? I am with you on Melb lockdown madness! In terms of your question, at the moment I can't see a way out of us being perpetually locked down. If at the moment there is a zero tolerance for Covid sickness or death, what will cause that tolerance to change in the future? I can't see a point when our politicians will say, look now it's OK that we have 1,000's of Covid cases, people are sick in hospital and dying with Covid because we/they have been vaccinated (like what happens with flu every year). Case in point was dictator Dan's presser on Monday when he was shit canning UKs freedom day due to high number of cases and deaths they are experiencing, but UK is at 85% first dose and 55% full vaccinated (with at risk groups being in the 90s) so if vaccines are our saviour then why is that a problem?
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible I want to open up but I can see it being a big dirty emotional argument - fear is one of the strongest emotions. Thats right. The problem with Australia's virus response is it has never been proportionate to the actual threat. Like I said you can buy cigarettes, alcohol and junk food as long as you are wearing a mask. I literally saw a guy riding a bike without a helmet while wearing a mask last year If you have a look at the overreaction to the vaccine threat, which is the same as every medication people can and do take, it is an equal response from the public to the zero tolerance response by the states. So how can response teams slam anti vaccine rot when their best expert health advice is wearing a mask while walking a dog down a lonely street. Its rot for rot as far as I'm concerned. The only point Enzo made that I agree with is a lot of vaccine hesitancy is a "wait and see" approach The fact is there is no way to open up with zero risk. Its an impossibility. There is no 6 month pathway out of it, no 100% vaccination program, no 100% quarantine program. What the states are doing with the virus is just unmatched in any industry and any response. It has become satirical If I was going to play devils advocate on the part of the response teams I'll say that nobody wants thousands of hypothetical deaths against their name. This is a big issue, in the media, being discussed every day, with high levels of scrutiny, driven by the majority voters who have jobs and cushy life styles. Its easy to see why entire states can be thrown into lockdown. But it has been a downward spiral with no restriction being deemed tough enough. The toughest hardest possible restrictions are the starting point and face masks are a so much a reflex I wouldnt be surprised if every response paper had them pre-typed as bullet point 1 I said at the start the biggest threat to Australia was never the virus itself but the management of the virus. Other countries which greater case loads and more deaths have found a pathway out because they have balanced it out with the need to live. We're simply going to hide under our mattress for the next few months fully vaccinated, fully masked, with some kind of asteroid repellent and anti dinosaur necklace because they might come back also
|
|
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible I agree that we need to open up once we reach a sizeable vaccination percentage. Not sure that 90% is it though - I doubt we can get that high. I imagine when we open up, it would only be for travellers who are vaccinated and there might be some shortened isolation periods (e.g. 7 days at home or in a resort). Our approach hasn't changed because we haven't hit any decent numbers in terms of vaccinations.
|
|
|
|
|
bluebird2
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 648,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xI don't claim to be an expert but how are continual lockdowns good for the economy compared to the alternative? Is it because we had job keeper and job seeker in 2020 which was the parachute payments for employers which kept everyone artificially afloat? https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/steeconomy-tipped-to-face-10b-hit-from-victoria-and-nsw-lockdowns-20210719-p58azu.htmlI read articles like this which shows such a dramatic hit to our two biggest states population bases and just can't understand how a state like Victoria can have three lockdowns this year alone and will continue to hit the big red switch in future. For a state that prides itself of dining, CBD night life and all that jazz there won't be much of it left after the wash up when there's plenty of business' on the brink. The theory is if COVID is allowed to spread, it would also damage the economy due to shutdowns and reductions in consumer sentiment. We can use Sweden as an example - they stayed open and their economy shrank, but not as much as the rest of Europe which had protracted lockdowns. simply opening up won't fix the issue. The Sweden example was before a vaccine so it is no longer relevant Australia has had 25160 cases for the under 60s and 20 deaths. The exact ratio of what we saw in the UK with 50000 infections and 40 deaths in a single day which corroborates the data. This isnt a coincidence due to how similar we are to them. We have known for 18 months this largely impacts older people 6392 Australians over 60 with the virus, 894 deaths (nearly 14%) Countries that have recognised this and have vaccinated their vulnerable are opening up today and ditching all other requirements. We dont have to go that far or that fast and still get an outcome. The key to opening up isnt vaccinating everybody over the age of 18. It is vaccinating most people over the age of 60. Our benchmarks are too strict which is something we have seen every step of the way, and why 3 states are currently in lockdown There is no reason why we cant open up internally based on 90%: . Over 70s vaccinated - no more lockdown . Over 60s vaccinated - no more restrictions above the baseline (quarantine, isolation orders, social distancing regulations, contact tracing venues and hot spot declaration) . Over 40s vaccinated - no more border closures or isolation based on "hot spots". Isolation based on venues only . Over 18s vaccinated - no more contact tracing venue based isolation or QR codes. Explore possibility of opening up and home quarantine The risk of the hospital systems being overrun even as we are today are significantly and substantially lower than last year with smarter systems in place and access to a vaccine. But it means accepting "some cases" instead of zero Australia's approach hasnt changed since last year and if anything has gotten tougher and tighter. South Australia in lockdown for 7 days over a linked case to the daughter of a known infection. Victoria in lockdown despite being across all cases and in a confident position As Poliacide said, we are in this position because of our zero case / zero death benchmark. When we weigh it up in a balanced way like other countries have done then more things become possible Our approach hasn't changed because we haven't hit any decent numbers in terms of vaccinations. Thats not entirely true for the simple reason there was no vaccination option until December last year and our risk assessment wasnt even finished until about February. Even today health officials havent stated the vaccine is a way out and AJF has touched on a few points to that regard above Australia had to manage 11 months of this pandemic without a vaccine and no certainty there would ever be one. The only lockdowns last year after the national one was the Victorian one and South Australia after they had mistakenly thought the virus was spreading on pizza delivery boxes. You could also argue that NSW had the "4 glorious reasons" at the end of last year for some parts of Sydney but the virus was already on a downward trend at that point. So I'd say 2.5 lockdowns Fast forward to today and now there is no other option outside of the toughest restrictions that can possibly be implemented followed by a 2 week dress code. And this is for a country that has only had 6 or 7 patient zeros that have infected more than 100 people. Thousands and thousands of others being the exception to the rule A vaccine was never a certainty and even today the specifics are being hotly debated. But there is no plan in place for managing 20 cases a day, all linked, which was the bread and butter for response teams that didnt have a vaccine a few months ago. Australia switched from a suppression approach to an aggressive elimination approach and under that system not even a vaccine is the answer Either way I think most people can agree it is an unsustainable approach. Something will break and something will change. For better or worse remains to be seen
|
|
|
|