Coronavirus - New Zealand





  • @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    You ain't quibbling, this stuff had a very real impact on very real people.



  • @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    Agree. Made this point to the wife earlier. What a massive boon for the supermarkets, they now get so their regular business, but also that of the local butcher, baker and bottle store. Should they be forced to repatriate some of this income given it's all Gov directed?



  • @voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    Agree. Made this point to the wife earlier. What a massive boon for the supermarkets, they now get so their regular business, but also that of the local butcher, baker and bottle store. Should they be forced to repatriate some of this income given it's all Gov directed?

    Govt choosing winners and losers to the ultimate degree. Most of the winners are public servants and Australian mega retailers and banks. Losers - NZ small business and employees.



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    You ain't quibbling, this stuff had a very real impact on very real people.

    I figured it wouldn't have saved all the job losses so far, but it would have still made a massive difference to a quite a few people. Biking around the local neighbourhood there's some curious things operating and not operating.



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    Agree. Made this point to the wife earlier. What a massive boon for the supermarkets, they now get so their regular business, but also that of the local butcher, baker and bottle store. Should they be forced to repatriate some of this income given it's all Gov directed?

    Govt choosing winners and losers to the ultimate degree. Most of the winners are public servants and Australian mega retailers and banks. Losers - NZ small business and employees.

    Yes, thats exactly it. Supermarkets / supply chains to supermarket / Amazon are all absolutely killing it.

    Others, nothing at all. The lockdown here is exactly the same.



  • @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    A limited view but, in South Australia at least, pretty much all retail shops ( butchers, fruit shops, actually there're examples of all shops still operating - just not bars cafes and gyms really) have the option to stay open and people are simply behaving in them the same as chemists and supermarkets.
    It's a pretty cruisy time around the town in the public sphere all up and lots of individual and pairs people out strolling.

    Conversations seldom feature what people are doing wrong and there's a lot of goodwill. I've been bloody impressed by the Aussie response in that it's allowed people to retain a lot of regular life and it seems to have fulfilled objective #1, slow the spread right now! We all talked about going full lockdown 10 days ago, everyone was sure of it. Now we can't really see how we'd need it.

    I've been a bit vexed by the vitriol coming off the fern about fellow citizens being fuckwits and deserving violence as retribution. I'm pretty sure I've read youse fullas getting uncharacteristically snarky to those you believe have endangered you. Yet the actual mortal combatant has only been found in the body of one person.

    You guys have changed in lockdown (understandably) and a basic lack of phatic communion with fellow kiwis may be all that's missing.

    Put me in the "did you really have to lockdown so severely?" camp - from my ignorant position thousands of miles away.



  • It's pretty early to try to draw conclusions in all of this.

    If you take the Baron's initial case of us without the stringent lockdown being 10x as bad - then that's surely also got to encompass us currently having 10,000 cv cases. What does that mean for where things go from here?

    Well, who knows.

    If you look at six of the worst-affected European countries - Italy, Spain , UK, France, Belgium and Netherlands - they're basically running at a 1/10 death rate for confirmed cases. And Boris - the most protected of protected - is intensive care. He'd be among NZ's 5 worst cases.

    And then the scale pretty much de-escalates to us at 1/1000.

    What's the difference?

    I'm fucked if I know. I can see modicums of difference, but not 1/10 vs 1/1000 - unless it's summer vs winter.



  • @Chris-B said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    It's pretty early to try to draw conclusions in all of this.

    If you take the Baron's initial case of us without the stringent lockdown being 10x as bad - then that's surely also got to encompass us currently having 10,000 cv cases. What does that mean for where things go from here?

    Well, who knows.

    If you look at six of the worst-affected European countries - Italy, Spain , UK, France, Belgium and Netherlands - they're basically running at a 1/10 death rate for confirmed cases. And Boris - the most protected of protected - is intensive care. He'd be among NZ's 5 worst cases.

    And then the scale pretty much de-escalates to us at 1/1000.

    What's the difference?

    I'm fucked if I know. I can see modicums of difference, but not 1/10 vs 1/1000 - unless it's summer vs winter.

    Why would look at the 6 worst when we had the opportunity to limit without knockdown?
    Australia is a closer example and we could have done a lot more than them and still gone full lockdown.

    The difference is in age of infected. And we could have taken measures to protect the "at risk" without full lock down



  • One I'm equivocal on; UberEats and meal deliveries.

    Domino's was advertising in their shop window right up until that Wednesday morning that they'd deliver during lockdown. I think the health risks of food deliveries probably were too high in the first stages. But ultimately pizza outlets and UberEats keeping a couple of local restaurant kitchens alive is even more business that has effectively ended up in Foodstuffs/Progressive's lap.

    Not sure if there was a realistic alternative to that one though.



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback You've got to look at all of the data. I haven't tried to develop a model - but, eyeballing the data is baffling.

    To be honest, I don't think age of infection comes close to explaining it.

    If you look at that NZ individual cases database on the MoH site, we've got lots of people over the age of 70 infected (89) that haven't died - another 149 over 60. We've got a couple of clusters in rest homes.

    That's about 1/5th of our cases. Why aren't about half of them dying?



  • @Chris-B said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @nzzp That surprises the hell out of me, as well.

    So when that guy is given the all clear and is "recovered" - both he and his wife will be in the clear to go to the supermarket - even though there's a fair probability she's going to have contracted it at some time during their self isolation - even if not yet showing symptoms?

    Surely they aren't that silly?

    @dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @nzzp Not quite accurate. He said that at the time protocols were followed but this did not include testing those who weren't close contacts or sympotomatic. Nevertheless all staff and students were isolated as soon as the cluster was identified. Under new protocols anyone with CV symptoms will be tested and from now even those with no symptoms will be tested if they have been in contact with a cluster.

    OK, so I did some digging. Turns out that response I thought I heard from Dr Bloomfield was spot on.

    as of 1 April:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/413135/covid-19-numbers-expected-to-rise-as-new-case-definition-issued

    The new guidelines say those with respiratory symptoms consistent with Covid-19 should be considered for testing, "regardless of travel history or contact with a confirmed case".

    So, if you live with someone who has C19, you do NOT get tested unless you present with respiratory symptoms consistent with C19. That absolutely blows my tiny little brain up. I'm going to sleep on this, can't figure it out right now.



  • @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse



  • @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse

    Will it though? Wouldn't that just delay the curve instead of flatten it?



  • @Bones said in Lockdown Check In:

    @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse

    Will it though? Wouldn't that just delay the curve instead of flatten it?

    That is the objective in NZ.

    We eradicate the disease within our borders and then we focus on keeping it out - until there is a vaccine or viable treatment..



  • @Bones said in Lockdown Check In:

    @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse

    Will it though? Wouldn't that just delay the curve instead of flatten it?

    Relative normalcy means we can start going back to work for starters



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Lockdown Check In:

    I was enjoying myself until today. Then within one hour had two different grown men on the phone in tears about their situation. Fucking sucked , put one on to lifeline as was clearly looking for that sort of thing, the other prob needs it but would not accept it.
    Those calls made me evaluate this situation in a whole new light. This lockdown is taking a massive toll, that is mostly unseen inside bubbles.

    See this is why I think the UK has taken the strategy it has.

    The government have taken unbelievable levels of criticism about not being entirely clear on what is locked down / what isn't and why can people still go to work if they aren't essential etc. And I think the above is why. There are so many unseen statistics / inferences that the government will use to devise their strategy. Things like crime rates / mental distress / suicides etc on the back of telling the whole country that you can't go to work. You have to weigh that up against a full-on lock down.

    How do you decide between 20,000 (mainly elderly / sick) passing and 5,000 young, healthy people who can't take the mental issues of a lockdown and find themselves as an horrific statistic. You just can't.

    I am no 100% pro everything the govt does, quite far from it. But in a pandemic, every single thing is a risk. Not just a risk of catching the virus. You gotta weigh them all up.



  • @MajorRage And that is at least partly why economics is labeled the dismal science. 🙂



  • @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Bones said in Lockdown Check In:

    @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse

    Will it though? Wouldn't that just delay the curve instead of flatten it?

    Relative normalcy means we can start going back to work for starters

    Minus many of the 230,000 people employed in tourism alone plus the flow on effects from that loss of income/spending in local communities. Overall it's a difficult situation whichever way we turn, but I fear we won't see relative normalcy in NZ for quite a while.



  • @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Bones said in Lockdown Check In:

    @canefan said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Chris-B said in Lockdown Check In:

    It's shit for a lot of people.

    That's what annoys me so much about all the people I see flouting the lockdown rules in bigger or smaller ways.

    People, today, who were wandering though the supermarket without even a fucking basket - their shopping was so small.

    One fuck-up by one person could end up costing us all billions of dollars.

    I'm of the opinion that the lockdown is a necessary evil, and that if we do well the country can emerge in a couple of weeks and get back to business. I'm sure there are many cases like the Baron has described, people facing major hardship, domestic violence and mental degradation. It was always going to be a bad deal all round, and like you it pisses me off when people don't follow the rules. Don't people understand that the reward for everyone doing their part will hopefully be relative normalcy in 14 days? And the punishment if too many people flout the rules and something goes wrong is extended lockdown? I am not sure if it is a state wide thing, but speaking to me sister earlier she said her kids' schools in Melbourne have all been closed for term 2 as well now. Anyone who risks mine and everyone else in the country's welfare just to satisfy a personal want should be fucking thrown in jail for the whole lockdown. If they don't give a shit about what is going on they don't deserve to have the tiny bit of freedom we have left. Not understanding is not a valid excuse

    Will it though? Wouldn't that just delay the curve instead of flatten it?

    That is the objective in NZ.

    We eradicate the disease within our borders and then we focus on keeping it out - until there is a vaccine or viable treatment..

    That's reliant on a massive assumption...



  • @antipodean Two.

    1. We can eradicate it.
    2. There will be a vaccine.


  • @taniwharugby said in Lockdown Check In:

    @Baron-Silas-Greenback I had a networking meeting this morning, and many of them are clients of mine, and you can see the strain on the faces of a few of them, but I have other clients who I know had a shit ton of work on prior to the lock down, I know some of it will be there after, but the world will be different, even if they due go back to level 3 and 2 in the next 2-4 weeks.

    One also mentioend 2 Dr's that have lost thier job too, although one of them has picked up work elsewhere...

    Does not compute





  • @nzzp said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    So, if you live with someone who has C19, you do NOT get tested unless you present with respiratory symptoms consistent with C19. That absolutely blows my tiny little brain up. I'm going to sleep on this, can't figure it out right now.

    I assume it has to do with the fact that members of the same household and other close contacts of those who have tested positive are automatically considered a probable case and must isolate and will be monitored the same way as people who have tested positive.

    The risk of getting false negatives may also play a role.



  • https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/120912750/coronavirus-how-new-zealands-level-4-covid19-lockdown-might-end

    This guy Hendy is starting to really annoy me, classic academic with no skin in the game, and even worse he is just a complex modeler.... grandoise term for a not grandoise role.. Now he is saying we could need 6-8 weeks full lockdown and then possibly going back into Lockdown as a country or in regions again and again if any new flare ups occur. Fuck. Off. Hendy I will take him seriously when he volunteers to lose his job and not work for the next 12 months id we extend the lockdown, let him feel some of the pain he is so keen to inflict. You can just tell he is loving his time in the spotlight that the media is giving him.
    /rant over



  • @Donsteppa said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm probably quibbling around the margins of the economic impact, but two things that surprised me as the first announcements about level 4 evolved:

    • I hadn't anticipated the closures being so narrow that supermarkets and dairies could open, but fruit shops and butchers could not. i.e. we could have helped keep a couple of smaller shops near us running rather than queuing for an hour at New World this morning with a ton of other people...

    • There has been a lack of imagination around any exception process. e.g. you can run a meat works chain, but not (non-urgent) roadworks in the open air where there's usually plenty of separation between workers (certainly on the large project near us there usually was).

    Social media went feral back when the Warehouse briefly decided it was an essential service, I wonder if that became an additional yardstick of what would be tolerated economically.

    I think there has been inconsistency in the approach of most of the nations we monitor closely. In fact, people in many of those countries, such as the USA, England and Australia have complained about restrictions either being too harsh or too relaxed. Almost every country has had a different response to the pandemic threat, and many (including us and the other 3 named as examples) have at times altered their strategies at least daily. I think it illustrates how difficult managing the crisis has proven to be. Some of the sharpest minds in the world are trying to solve this challenge and no one appears to have all the answers



  • @Stargazer said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    So, if you live with someone who has C19, you do NOT get tested unless you present with respiratory symptoms consistent with C19. That absolutely blows my tiny little brain up. I'm going to sleep on this, can't figure it out right now.

    I assume it has to do with the fact that members of the same household and other close contacts of those who have tested positive are automatically considered a probable case and must isolate and will be monitored the same way as people who have tested positive.

    The risk of getting false negatives may also play a role.

    Righto, so the Stuff article at the bottom says a probable case is:

    This is a person who has returned a negative laboratory test result but the clinician looking after the person has diagnosed them as a probable case due to their exposure history and their clinical symptoms. These cases are actually treated as if they were a positive laboratory confirmed case and the actions taken are the same as for a confirmed case. That is self-isolation and active contact tracing."

    so a number of false negatives already, for people presenting with symptoms.

    Here's the thing I'm trying to get my head around. We know that this virus has a long incubation period. We know that a number of people are asymptomatic (and it sounds like people can have it without symptoms). This makes me wonder how reliable the cases are - basically to be counted as a 'case', you are showing symptoms and either test positive, or be in contact with someone who tested positive.

    If you can have it and be asymptomatic, then we have no ideahow many people are carrying the virus, but not showing symptoms.

    Presumably this also means that the false negative rate in testing is not good.

    If we can't eradicate this during the lockdown (and I presume it can't be lifted early given the lack of information), then we're into these flare up situations. If we do get flare ups in locations where people weren't tested, then I am going to be pretty disappointed.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/120861484/what-are-probable-cases-and-why-are-they-rising



  • @Baron-Silas-Greenback couldn't like your post more. Your post about your employees has been circling in my head, and I'm getting tired of the likes of Jacinda and Trudeau talking about worring about the economy later.



  • @Kirwan Truedeau is irrelevant for me but is that what Jacinda has said? That they will worry about it later, despite pumping money back into business to help them stay afloat where possible?



  • @Kirwan @Baron-Silas-Greenback - I see no evidence that the government isn't incredibly concerned about the economy. They're spending billions to support it.

    I didn't think that the article that so triggered the Baron said anything other than common sense. He starts by saying that the results of the lockdown have been really encouraging but then goes on (presumably prompted by the journalist) to talk of other scenario's. Like if it flares up again, if people don't do what they're told. Again basic common sense - the worst affected (per head) nation on earth, has had fewer than 150K cases. Even if you said they had 10 times as many as reported that's still only 2.5% of their overall population. It stands to reason that you have to remain vigilant after the initial outbreak. Right up until a vaccine.

    It's why pandemic modelling always has successive waves of cases.



  • @dogmeat Is or isn't? (Your first line)



  • What do we think will happen when the 4 weeks is up? ( we will know before then of course)



  • @Hooroo cheers - corrected. Slightly changes the nuance...



  • @Virgil
    Level 3 Restrict
    Heightened risk that disease is not contained.
    Risk assessment
    Community transmission occurring OR
    Multiple clusters break out.
    Range of measures
    These can all be applied locally or nationally:
    travel in areas with clusters or community transmission limited
    affected educational facilities closed
    mass gatherings cancelled
    public venues closed (eg libraries, museums, cinemas, food courts, gyms, pools, amusement parks)
    alternative ways of working required and some non-essential businesses should close
    non face-to-face primary care consultations
    non acute (elective) services and procedures in hospitals deferred and healthcare staff reprioritised.

    My guess as of today is country moves to Lvl 3 but anywhere that looks like it may have an incipient outbreak goes back to lvl 4. Wage subsidy continues. Hospo industry still shut down. Companies encouraged to have as many as possible work from home and have to record everyone on their premises even for a couple of minutes (couriers excepted) Schools remain closed for another two weeks Travel between regions banned except for essential.... whatever that means

    I think the key to a relaxation is a better form of contact tracing



  • @dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I think the key to a relaxation is a better form of contact tracing

    yes, and potential eradication in the community.

    If we eradicate in the community, then a faster turnaround test and contact tracing lets people get back towards normality. Limit socialisation, but record it - basically you'd be expected to (through and App?) idenitfy everyone you have had close contact with in the past X days.

    We still seem to be largely flying blind though, and don't have good answers to a heap of questions.

    • How long after you get infected do symptoms start?
    • Can you infect people before symptoms start, and what's the infection risks at different stages of the disease?
    • Can you have C19, be asymptomatic and still transmit the disease?

    As we understand this better (and I"m sure it's close), the shape of a post-L4 starts to clarify. If people are only an infection risk for 48 hours before symptoms show, then that's a whole different risk level to being 7 days infectious.



  • @Hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Kirwan Truedeau is irrelevant for me but is that what Jacinda has said? That they will worry about it later, despite pumping money back into business to help them stay afloat where possible?

    Worry about it later is a direct Trudeau quote. Jacinda has said that she will not put the economy before peoples lives, admittedly early in the crisis.

    IMO, that's in the same boat, as we routinely put the ecomomy before people's lives. We have a rationed health system (we don't provide life saving drugs to some people if it's too expensive, for example).

    I just get concerned when I hear people like Dr Bloomfield talk about eradicating the virus. At what cost?

    At the moment if we get just two suicides for a hopeless outlook thanks to job losses, then we have double the death rate of the virus. I want to know they have a line in the sand where, as Antipodean keeps stating, the cure is worse than the disease.

    I'm not seeing it, I see a pretty dogmatic, almost blinkered approach at the moment. As if cratering the economy can be fixed later.



  • @Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    @Kirwan Truedeau is irrelevant for me but is that what Jacinda has said? That they will worry about it later, despite pumping money back into business to help them stay afloat where possible?

    Worry about it later is a direct Trudeau quote. Jacinda has said that she will not put the economy before peoples lives, admittedly early in the crisis.

    IMO, that's in the same boat, as we routinely put the ecomomy before people's lives. We have a rationed health system (we don't provide life saving drugs to some people if it's too expensive, for example).

    I just get concerned when I hear people like Dr Bloomfield talk about eradicating the virus. At what cost?

    At the moment if we get just two suicides for a hopeless outlook thanks to job losses, then we have double the death rate of the virus. I want to know they have a line in the sand where, as Antipodean keeps stating, the cure is worse than the disease.

    I'm not seeing it, I see a pretty dogmatic, almost blinkered approach at the moment. As if cratering the economy can be fixed later.

    I don't have that downbeat look to this. That is part of what we will go through and not a reason to change anything in my view. People are going to die and some will kill themselves and that is a sad outcome but not one that I think we need to be doing anything different because.



  • @Kirwan said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

    I'm not seeing it, I see a pretty dogmatic, almost blinkered approach at the moment. As if cratering the economy can be fixed later.

    I'm not convinced that the Govt will really understand how the economy works. There's some real risks with all governments wanting to borrow at the same time to stimulate. I can't see a way for the economy to really restart by increasing taxes and increased wages, combined with stimulus , but I suspect that's the route that we'll see taken.



  • @Kirwan We also put peoples lives ahead of the economy every single day of the year - terminal cancer patients Alzheimer sufferers. The list is a very long one and as a society it is what we expect our governments to do.

    I've said before - it is not a binary choice - the trick is to get the balance right, but that's an impossible task. At the moment with caveats I think the govt is doing OK.

    The argument we've only had x cases or y deaths doesn't really wash for me - exactly. It's working.



  • @dogmeat
    Everyone knows and says it isn't a binary choice, but the govt isn't acting much like that. People love saying that the virus transmits exponentially, but so does an economic collapse. And we are about to experience one.


Log in to reply