Ali's Choice wrote: terryfinch wrote:
Clogs wrote:We go into another lockdown from midnight tomorrow. 6 more weeks. Fvck!
In my opinion the wrong approach. This virus is now a fact of life. It doesn’t go away. Lockdown is too blunt an instrument. Track, trace and localised lockdowns (places of work, tower blocks, ....) seems the most practical way to go, keeping a lid on it that way. Wide scale lockdowns cause too much damage.
Can you please show us an example of a country or jurisdiction that has successfully slowed the spread COVID 19 using only localised lock-downs, rather than a more general approach?
I doubt there is one, because this is a simple (although not binary) proposition.
In Oz, the gov'ts (plural) acted on the medical advice and got good results. The measures taken have trashed the economy. You are probably no worse off if you are a public servant, work for the ABC, or you work for a large corporation with high capitalisation. However, if you are a small-medium business proprietor, or an employee of one, or you work as a subbie in your own business (as I do), you are bleeding at the moment. Nonetheless, that is the way governments went - they took the medical advice route, to minimize the infection/death toll.
Dan Andrews said on the news tonight "This is going to cause economic damage, but there is no choice"... without risking more infections and deaths. That is not absolutely correct. If you put a military dictator in charge of this, in the style of the Roman Republic in time of crisis, that dictator would likely come up with an approach which was willing to accept some low level of casualties now, to get a better outcome (economically) in the short-medium term.
The media would crucify any suggestion of such an approach. I do not think the media have any empathy with people invested in, and working in the small and medium enterprises that are about to be crushed by renewed lockdowns.