Coronavirus damage to society

Hm, but how are further measures for everyone going to address the actions of "a minority of significantly relevant people" that have be proven to be untrustworthy.
Do those measures make them more trustworthy or likely to comply? Doubt it.

 

Easier to pull up ... become social pariahs ... fined ... arrested ... also reaffirms how serious this is to those that are dithering

 

If that's the aim of the measures it seems an unfair tradeoff to me as it also destroys the livelihood of many

 

How hard would it be in Government to please everybody. So many different people around, different beliefs, different ideas, different agendas.
Man tough gig at the moment

 

What trade of? Life ... healthy life ... versus ... ?

 

Ask a group of 100 people, and nobody is ever going to be completely in agreement on absolutely any issue you can care to name. Same for the medical professional, or other science and evidence based profession. But taken as a whole the majority of educated people in those professions do agree along certain lines, and hence why there is a lot of agreement on current measures. Even among the opposition at the state and federal level, for the most part, they are all in agreement, and that very very rarely happens.

There are plenty of quacks, and unfortunately the Internet have given them way too much voice.

 

Goodness me...are we in kindergarten? This is really very very simple. We all understand that it cannot be eradicated completely and the risk cannot be reduced to an acceptable level without a vaccine, but we also know that we can do plenty to flatten the curve. Deliberately ignoring sensible, practical and effective methods to slow it/reduce it/curtail its spread comes down to individual attitudes and behaviours. It's got nothing to do with trust or distrust in Government- how about some trust in common sense? If washing hands regularly, staying home more than not, denying yourself those beers at St Kilda or Bondi , and wearing a mask at Woolies or Coles or Aldi is really that difficult for someone, that isnt any politicians fault...


This kinda says it all...

 

From your previous response the measures are to,

So the trade-off is the above vs people's jobs and livelihoods.

 

Well we were primarily talking about stage 4 restrictions particularly curfew and the like which don't appear to be all that logical. Also the aim needs to be clear. What is the aim? And how does the curfew contribute.
I agree that some of the measures are sensible but not all are and obviously everyone's idea of what is sensible is different.
The government has to get people onboard which requires mutual trust.
In March April it worked ok but now it is more difficult. Why is that so? Have people changed or has their view of the government and virus changed?

 

You mean like 2009, the tech wreck, the 1987 recession, the great depression and a dozen other challenging financial periods in between? Bounce back occurred every other time in the past and history is a great teacher

What they also are is a great opportunity to reset the economy, reaffirm what is really important in society and adjust our capitalist mindsets. Personally I know three people who lost work temporarily ... now back at work ... and everyone else had never been busier

 

Virus definitely has changed

 

It's not .. it is a choice between a crushed economy and many lives lost (US example), and a crushed economy and many lives saved (Australia example). So people's jobs and livelihoods are stuffed anyway in the short/medium term no matter which path is taken. And I think most would prefer the "lives saved" option where possible, especially when it comes down to somebody you know dying or being seriously injured with the disease. It has been seen in many other countries across the world in harsh vs less harsh lockdowns, that the end result doesn't vary that much in terms of the economic impact.

Even if you let the economy fully re-open, eventually enough people start dying, or get seriously sick, that everybody naturally goes turtle and starts avoiding going outside, becoming fearful, depressed, and stop fully participating in the economy anyway. Then jobs are lost anyway. So either way, you can't win.

To think that suddenly allowing everybody to go about their normal lives will suddenly reduce the economic impact of this virus is fallacy.

 

In a normal world not this Covid world, if we had 10% unemployment would it be a major problem?

 

Business comes business goes. Customers come customers leave that is just how it is. But to take away the opportunity for someone to be allowed to run their business is not the right approach imho. Not sure what your viewpoint is but it is similar to the non-eviction rules in place.

 

I vote people....... jobs and livelihoods

 

Actually that is an interesting one. Assuming the virus wants to survive and replicate. Will attempts to reduce replication cause the virus to mutate towards becoming more infectious?
I have no idea but would interest me if that is posssible. If someone has experience in virology let me know.

 

you dont need the internet To find quacks... reputable medical journals are publishing false/fake tests.......Lancet......recently had to apologise .... for this

 

I'm pretty sure health and lives was implied with people. Just that health is not limited to covid and physical health.
Interesting discussion about age care I saw on TV talking about how people having their health severely effected by not being able to see relatives or not being allowed to touch each other due to distancing, etc. Surely we can do better than that.
People don't have a right to be healthy but they do have a right to be treated with dignity and respect.

 

$250,000 in fines handed out in 24 hours. There is a very good reason that the Victorian government doesn't trust the public to do the right thing.