What do you mean by this commentYeah, same old story. An excuse to bring out those things festering below the surface.
depends which state...I don't think we're taking this seriously enough. Chief medical officer saying that it's okay for children that have been in China in the last two weeks to go to school. Saying there is no reason for healthy children not to go. It goes against the general understanding that the virus is transmissible during incubation when no symptoms are showing. It's either extremely blasé or they don't hold any hopes for it being containable.
The secondary infections are just becoming apparent in other countries now.
It's $1,000 per person to fly them from a region where commercial airlines are no longer flying, and in a logistical exercise which will require bespoke quarantine requirements and practices implemented just for them, its the equivalent of what an air-fare would have cost pre health emergency. Seems like a pretty reasonable and fair practice, its optional and some families have declined to fly anyway.I find it difficult to get my head around the fact that our government is proposing to charge families $1,000 per child to evacuate 140 Australian children stuck in Wuhan to Christmas Island where they will be quarantined for two week
Would it have.....True, but there are obviously no fatalities on an significant scale, that would have leaked.
I wouldn't be banking on the stock rebounding depending on how the government intervention works, if it comes through a form i nationalisation then you're stock will face a dilution, and long recovery as you now have a major shareholder not exactly driven by profits, rather delivering an essential service to the people.Maybe not officially, but effectively yes, given the bailouts, tax breaks and whatnot, all of which will need to happen as Qantas is a critical service that many people rely on around this country.
Tempted to buy stocks right now, knowing that the government won't let them fail, which means they'll most likely rebound very strongly once this is over.
Christ it's easier said then done.. You could also allow people to hunt as well, but then there's issues with permits and licenses. Problem is, politicians are now risk adverse and these could be seen a confrontational subjects that aren't worth the riskI'm all for culling the feral horses..........we should simply do it as they are making a mess of our alpine environment. The same goes for dear, which are out of control in Victoria and camels, wild boar etc in other parts of the country
i commented on hunting licenses for deer, what the **** does that have to do with ChinaThe point of that conversation was, that we are not in a position to criticise China. It's all hard. And we barely try here. All the effort is put into making it look like something is being done, not actually doing it. The legacy of an aspirational culture that is too removed from the onground reality. If anything positive comes out of this, I hope it is a reality check.
I literally just commented on deer licenses in Australia :nuts:I think we have grounds to criticise China, in particular the government on the basis that the virus started there and the fact that they see eating such obviously dangerous wildlife (bats in particular being renounce disease carriers), as a delicacy. Its a disgrace frankly. The list of practices that much of the world would see as abhorrent goes on and on and yet the Chinese communist party doesn't give a ****. Yes, they appear to have been ruthlessly efficient in shutting down the virus in their own country, however they are causing economic and social armageddon for the rest of the world. I hope this whole mess results in the downfall of their government......don't be surprised if the US decides to completely ban all trade with China after this.........
No shit mate, and those economic impacts will be magnified if the trend follows what has happened in Italy and the health system is overwhelmed with critical patients.Economics effect health too and the reality is most people will be effected economically than virally.
theres a pretty clear and obvious reasonEveryone keeps looking to Italy as if it’s inevitable it’s going to happen here regardless of the fact many countries are relatively unaffected including us. Economic Armageddon for no reason.
nah, opinions like this are dangerous..What’s dangerous is what we are doing to our economy and now all those poor places that have to close down just announced tonight. This is a major WTF. If unemployment doesn’t hit 20% I’ll be very surprised. But at least we will save less than 1% of less than 1%. This is ****ed. Words cannot describe how completely ****ed this is.
This is utter nonsense.Yep, this is the issue. Totally and utterly get the message out there to isolate the vulnerable and elderly. This goes to every level. But isolating the rest? Be reasonable. The data coming in shows absolutely that the vast majority of us that get this? We will be just fine. And yes, people fall between those cracks and someone will be reported as "young, no preconditions and died". We will never know the intricacies of each and every case - you can only see the bigger stats. That tells me we are panicking and assuming we are ALL at risk equally because we are all carriers that will just go up to the vulnerable and elderly and hug them. No we won't. We are going to have bigger problems with all these poor souls loosing their business. I'm sorry, the economics medicine of this is not a cold hearted view of just letting the elderly die. It is quite the opposite. If the curve for the 97% that get it is large? It's not the point. It's the curve of fatalities that matter. So when the rabid press take Trump out of context about rebooting the economy? Yeah well, **** them because the guy, though hardly the most articulate tool in the shed, has a point, when seen in context and with the facts.
Maybe i missed it, but nowhere in that article does it state that the "vast majority of us will be fine", nor does it state "vast majority are not at risk".I get that but I truly believe, when this is over, there is going to be a lot of review and when the dust settles? They will realise the over reaction to the lockdown was not great. Not all epidemiologists are singing the same tune:
Error - Cookies Turned Off
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Again, the current stats are clearly showing the vast majority are not at risk and that the disparity is that those at risk, are VERY much at risk. Of course this line is not absolute but with sound judgment on preconditions and such? Strong enforcement of isolation for the vulnerable. I'm sorry - it is true; you don't want the cure being worse than the actual virus. Yes, it's a balancing game but cool heads need to prevail.
Show me where your verified sources of information are then, you're making claims stating that "the vast majority of us will be just fine" and that the "vast majority are not at risk" but I've seen no verified figures which actually support this narrative that you're pushing. Nor have i seen any empirical evidence to suggest that isolating just the vulnerable in their homes will serve to stop the spread of the virus or mitigate the looming shortage medical resources to treat the issue, nor have i seen any evidence that suggests doing so would allow the economy to carry on its merry way now that its missing over a quarter of its workforce.It's not nonsense. Those figures in the US are not even verified. Is your source Vox perchance? The data clearly shows from Italy and China (if you can believe them) that the fatality rate of the demographic outside the elderly and preconditioned vulnerable, is very very low.
I'm NOT saying we can just go our merry way and just continue the function of our society. Do not put words in my mouth. I am talking about cool headed bi-partisan factual based responses. Of course we should restrict crowd sizes. Of course we should restrict borders. Of course we should enforce isolation for the vulnerable and obvious situations (like ships wanting to dock).
This is what happens when you are hammered 24/7 with the massive misinformation from the irresponsible mainstream media. The fucken MSM running this show like it's the Gulf War all over again. They are the one's stopping the rational conversations about this. I don't apologise that I have a different view to you. The thing with my view? If y I see empirical evidence that all these demographics are truly more at risk. I'll change my tune here and now.