Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@Paekakboyz said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so testing all comers to see if they are actually sick then?
Don’t you be coming on here with your logic and common sense.
-
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Paekakboyz said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so testing all comers to see if they are actually sick then?
Don’t you be coming on here with your logic and common sense.
I always find it amusing when anybody actually tries to debate with Winger, especially when relying on logic and/or common sense as a tactic.
-
It's more fun that playing out of the frypan and into the fire with our departed Baron!
Guess I was just feeling a bit spicy today lol
-
@Kruse In Winger’s world we have Schroedinger’s Catch-22 Escher’s Staircase Möbius health screening. You have the right to move about freely and can’t be quarantined if you’re healthy. But because people can be asymptomatic, at any given time you may or may not be sick and the only way to know is to check. But you can’t check because healthy people have the right not to be checked. So therefore you have to be treated as if you were sick. Which involves quarantine. Which is a breach of your rights if you are healthy. But the only way to tell if ... etc. ad infinitum
-
@Paekakboyz said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so testing all comers to see if they are actually sick then?
I was too tired to make the point. Thank you for doing it for me. Arguing with Winger reminds me of this
-
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kruse In Winger’s world we have Schroedinger’s Catch-22 Escher’s Staircase Möbius health screening. You have the right to move about freely and can’t be quarantined if you’re healthy. But because people can be asymptomatic, at any given time you may or may not be sick and the only way to know is to check. But you can’t check because healthy people have the right not to be checked. So therefore you have to be treated as if you were sick. Which involves quarantine. Which is a breach of your rights if you are healthy. But the only way to tell if ... etc. ad infinitum
Im just making the point that in the past leaders haven't quarantined healthy people. In fact sick people have been allowed to travel and work so even sick people have been free to pass their flu around (and applauded for it for their dedication to work) to everyone else. That pissed me off on public transport with seriously ill people on the train or bus. Or at work half full (as one sick person passes it on to everyone else) of sick workers.
So we have moved from one silly extreme to another one. That has never been done before. And has destroyed Western economies. My view its too high a price to pay when less extreme measures could have been used (Sweden plus protect the vulnerable for eg). And still could be now. It would however include a risk cost evaluation that this Govt (and most Western Govts) seems incapable of doing.
-
@Kruse said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Paekakboyz said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so testing all comers to see if they are actually sick then?
Don’t you be coming on here with your logic and common sense.
I always find it amusing when anybody actually tries to debate with Winger, especially when relying on logic and/or common sense as a tactic.
So logic and common sense = destroying the economy as the only option. Not a sensible risk cost assessment
-
@Winger You would do yourself a lot of favours if you stopped trying to present everything as black or white. The thing with false dichotomies is they are false.
Half the posters in this thread, including myself, have expressed real frustrations and concerns about the economic impact of the lockdown, so your hardly a contrarian in that regard.
But to suggest the only alternatives are a wrecked economy or letting people do whatever they want unless somehow they are classified as vulnerable (and Jesus only knows how you would do that without infringing people’s rights) lacks nuance that you must surely know is part of the story here.
-
@Winger said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Kruse said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Paekakboyz said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so testing all comers to see if they are actually sick then?
Don’t you be coming on here with your logic and common sense.
I always find it amusing when anybody actually tries to debate with Winger, especially when relying on logic and/or common sense as a tactic.
So logic and common sense = destroying the economy as the only option. Not a sensible risk cost assessment
I love your work.
I truly, truly do. Never leave us. -
@Winger so how do we determine who to quarantine and who to set free?
Surely there is a test of some sort they can do?
So 2 new cases today, 1 is the child of the couple yesterday and another who is also a recent arrival in quaratine, her partner is awaiting his result.
So 7 cases, all in isolation and aside from the 2 wanderers who were out for a period, all have been in isolation the whole time.
GUess the issue there is how good is the isolation so we dont end up with a situation like those cruise ships...
If you were open to conspiracy theories: 0 cases for 3 weeks or so, those 2 women go walkabout, suddenly we start getting cases reported again (albeit in isolation...)
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@Winger so how do we determine who to quarantine and who to set free?
For starters I would quarantine anyone from a high risk country. Like the UK. For 2 weeks no exceptions (but see last comment)
Also anyone in NZ who has it.But what about low risk countries like Aust. Surely open borders could be tried and see how it goes. If suddenly outbreaks occur then close things down. But not close it down like they did before. NZ needs to find a way to live with flu's that will always be with us. Different if a killer black death appears but this flu is not even close. In fact it seems no worse than many previous flu's. And we got by without much disruption before
My view is Govts totally overreacted and now people are reacting as if stupid (and incompetent) Western Govt's are a given. Rather than pressuring Govt's to not be so f++king stupid. For example Sweden plus protecting the vulnerable
-
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
But to suggest the only alternatives are a wrecked economy or letting people do whatever they want unless somehow they are classified as vulnerable (and Jesus only knows how you would do that without infringing people’s rights) lacks nuance that you must surely know is part of the story here.
But Ive never suggested this. Quite the opposite. The previous anything goes approach (sick at work) pissed me off. So I want a more mature approach based on a sensible risk cost assessment. But also not throwing our human rights out the window. Unless a say deadly killing black plague type flu reappears with no cure. The I would willingly accept tougher measures.
edit and here's one opinion that I sort of agree with. But the public have largely gone along with this lock-down. Until this changes the madness will continue
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/300037792/new-zealand-will-be-left-behind-with-covidhysteria
OPINION: The latest series of Covid-19 blunders is a timely reminder that the entire premise of the lockdown was hubris. The bureaucrats went from flattening the curve to believing that they could eliminate the virus and quarantine a population of 5 million people indefinitely from the 7 billion other people on the planet.
They can't. The inevitability of this program's failure, however, does not mean we will abandon it easily. But we will abandon it.
Governments don't walk away from a policy merely because it isn't working. They simply re-double their efforts, imposing more costs and stripping away more freedoms while the populace cheers them on to ever-greater acts of idiocy until we all exhaust ourselves and move on to the next crisis.
For the moment, however, we are at war with a virus and believe that our public officials can keep out a microscopic bug when they can't prevent cocaine from being smuggled in. We've now called in the army to patrol the border; because using soldiers to control a civilian population always works well.
-
-
2 new cases today, both in managed facilities, taking total to 9.
I hope the isolation facilities are getting thier shit together because not only the risk to the wider public, but an outbreak in a facility could be really bad too.
-
@Winger said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@JC said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
But to suggest the only alternatives are a wrecked economy or letting people do whatever they want unless somehow they are classified as vulnerable (and Jesus only knows how you would do that without infringing people’s rights) lacks nuance that you must surely know is part of the story here.
But Ive never suggested this. Quite the opposite. The previous anything goes approach (sick at work) pissed me off. So I want a more mature approach based on a sensible risk cost assessment. But also not throwing our human rights out the window. Unless a say deadly killing black plague type flu reappears with no cure. The I would willingly accept tougher measures.
edit and here's one opinion that I sort of agree with. But the public have largely gone along with this lock-down. Until this changes the madness will continue
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/300037792/new-zealand-will-be-left-behind-with-covidhysteria
OPINION: The latest series of Covid-19 blunders is a timely reminder that the entire premise of the lockdown was hubris. The bureaucrats went from flattening the curve to believing that they could eliminate the virus and quarantine a population of 5 million people indefinitely from the 7 billion other people on the planet.
They can't. The inevitability of this program's failure, however, does not mean we will abandon it easily. But we will abandon it.
Governments don't walk away from a policy merely because it isn't working. They simply re-double their efforts, imposing more costs and stripping away more freedoms while the populace cheers them on to ever-greater acts of idiocy until we all exhaust ourselves and move on to the next crisis.
For the moment, however, we are at war with a virus and believe that our public officials can keep out a microscopic bug when they can't prevent cocaine from being smuggled in. We've now called in the army to patrol the border; because using soldiers to control a civilian population always works well.
That opinion piece starts from a wrong position.
There was never an aim that we would become totally free of the virus but there was an aim to eliminate community transmission and be ready to identify, trace and manage threats.
The important thing now is to get the second part of that running properly. I think that in the excitement of reducing cases to zero all parties lost stringency on that aspect.We need a clear, communicated plan on incoming people just like we did on part one.
-
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
2 new cases today, both in managed facilities, taking total to 9.
I hope the isolation facilities are getting thier shit together because not only the risk to the wider public, but an outbreak in a facility could be really bad too.
Yes, agree about the facililtes need for controlling spread within.
Got colleague coming back from India. Have to move from unaffected part of country to/via hotspot (Delhi) to get the flight. There will be a regular trickle of new cases coming in now, I think.
-
so a side effect of our shitty quarantine/isolation and I think in part to poor reporting in the media...I have seen hundreds of people sitting in thier car waiting to be tested at one of the testing stations up here this morning, assume similar scenes at other stations around NZ?
I expect most, if not all will just have 'normal' flu or cold and are worried given the recent spike.
All the 'calmness' of our great leader needs to step up and take control.