Melbourne. About to be fvcked again. Fvck you Ozzie Open!

All things Rugby
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

Farva wrote:

There is no doubt that many people who would have voted for a republic didnt because they didnt like the model put forward.
Can you please identify the evidence for that statement? Opinion pieces by ABC & SMH journos are not evidence.

Also, it can equally be said "There is no doubt that many people who voted for a republic would have voted 'no' if the other model had been put forward".
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by 6.Jones »

Ellafan wrote:
Farva wrote:

There is no doubt that many people who would have voted for a republic didnt because they didnt like the model put forward.
Can you please identify the evidence for that statement? Opinion pieces by ABC & SMH journos are not evidence.

Also, it can equally be said "There is no doubt that many people who voted for a republic would have voted 'no' if the other model had been put forward".
We know by reference to the [often acrimonious] debate within the Republican movement at the time. The minimal change republicans wanted a parliamentary republic - and some a McGarvie Model republic - while the progressive republicans wanted a popularly elected head of state. The referendum was deliberately worded [as was the government's right] to split those constituencies by pinning the two-thirds majority clause to a yes vote. Politics [and refrenda] 101. To argue otherwise is disingenuous. As Menzies famously said, "to get an affirmative vote from the Australian people on a referendum proposal is one of the labours of Hercules."
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
President Scomo?
You well know that isn't the Republican model we're discussing

The North shore really is Little England
More to the point, the North shore isn't the inner city - if you read the AEC statistical report on the referendum, A very interesting pattern emerges.

The inner city areas of Sydney and Melbourne were the only places where the yes vote got up. In the outer suburbs, other state capital cities, and rural areas the no vote prevailed. No won 55% to 45%, an additionally no state voted yes.

Basically, the majority of the electorate viewed the whole thing as some elitist inner city trendy thing. ;)

https://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/refere ... tatistics/
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 4595
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

6.Jones wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Farva wrote:

There is no doubt that many people who would have voted for a republic didnt because they didnt like the model put forward.
Can you please identify the evidence for that statement? Opinion pieces by ABC & SMH journos are not evidence.

Also, it can equally be said "There is no doubt that many people who voted for a republic would have voted 'no' if the other model had been put forward".
We know by reference to the [often acrimonious] debate within the Republican movement at the time. The minimal change republicans wanted a parliamentary republic - and some a McGarvie Model republic - while the progressive republicans wanted a popularly elected head of state. The referendum was deliberately worded [as was the government's right] to split those constituencies by pinning the two-thirds majority clause to a yes vote. Politics [and refrenda] 101. To argue otherwise is disingenuous. As Menzies famously said, "to get an affirmative vote from the Australian people on a referendum proposal is one of the labours of Hercules."
First, that is a hypothesis. Where is the evidence that shows it is correct? Can you point me to a PHD thesis, or published scholarly work that has evidence from a sufficiently large sample of ordinary punters, interviewed after the event, disclosing their real motivations for voting 'no'?

Secondly, there was a constitutional convention which came up with the proposal. They couldn't come up with a form that commanded a majority vote within the convention. That was because, in the end, the hard-line republicans abstained. The government of the day put up the proposal that had the most votes. Saying John Howard "deliberately worded [it] to split" the republican vote is disingenuous.

Thirdly, Phil Cleary, a leading figure in the hard-line republicans, made a misjudgement - he was of the view that a failed referendum now (then) would be followed by other referenda, where the elected president model might eventually get up. So if you want a single person to shoulder the blame, it's Cleary. Having said that, he may still be proven correct; when the Queen goes, there will likely be a push to get rid of Charlie III, so it might just take a bit longer than he thought.

Fourthly, attempting to apportion the reason for the rejection of the referendum to one cause, and misrepresenting it as a result of a partisan manipulation, is overly simplistic. It's similar to a disappointed losing team fan blaming the referee. There are at least 10 reasons for the no vote succeeding.
User avatar
kiap
Posts: 20080
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by kiap »

Ellafan wrote:
Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
President Scomo?
You well know that isn't the Republican model we're discussing

The North shore really is Little England
More to the point, the North shore isn't the inner city - if you read the AEC statistical report on the referendum, A very interesting pattern emerges.

The inner city areas of Sydney and Melbourne were the only places where the yes vote got up. In the outer suburbs, other state capital cities, and rural areas the no vote prevailed. No won 55% to 45%, an additionally no state voted yes.

Basically, the majority of the electorate viewed the whole thing as some elitist inner city trendy thing. ;)

https://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/refere ... tatistics/
North Shore (lower and upper) suburbs voted yes, as did the lower Northern Beaches

Image

Also various seats in all state capitals + ACT + (green tints above)
User avatar
Enzedder
Posts: 20222
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Enzedder »

Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.

Shall we merge this with the Aussie politics thread.
User avatar
shanky
Posts: 20717
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by shanky »

But on the bright side, MB appears to have fvcked off, taling his faux concern for our well-being with him. :thumbup:
User avatar
Enzedder
Posts: 20222
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Enzedder »

In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
Maybe when Queenie goes, we can appoint Harry president for life. He needs a job, and anyway, he's not really a Windsor.
User avatar
usermame
Posts: 5225
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Te Ika a Maui

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by usermame »

Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
Yes, it's terrifying. And then we have uber cunts like Hosking.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mik ... advantage/

He should do his show from Melbourne.
Last edited by usermame on Wed Aug 05, 2020 9:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13626
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by MungoMan »

Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
True. Not learning from others' mistakes is a well-developed form of silliness.
User avatar
Enzedder
Posts: 20222
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Enzedder »

usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
Yes, it's terrifying. And then we have uber cunts like Hosking.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mik ... advantage/

He should do his show from Melbourne.
His Mrs this morning was bordering offensive with some of her discussion points. I am waiting for one of them to out and out blame labour for the whole virus.
User avatar
usermame
Posts: 5225
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Te Ika a Maui

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by usermame »

Ellafan wrote:
Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
Maybe when Queenie goes, we can appoint Harry president for life. He needs a job, and anyway, he's not really a Windsor.
Well the Windsors aren't really Windsors are they?
User avatar
usermame
Posts: 5225
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Te Ika a Maui

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by usermame »

Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
User avatar
shanky
Posts: 20717
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by shanky »

usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
Well at least there’s onecountry that has it all together, Yeah?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
;) ;)
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

kiap wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Basically, the majority of the electorate viewed the whole thing as some elitist inner city trendy thing. ;)

https://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/refere ... tatistics/
North Shore (lower and upper) suburbs voted yes, as did the lower Northern Beaches

Image

Also various seats in all state capitals + ACT + (green tints above)
So, looks like my electorate is not so little England.... that is however consistent with the proposition that the real reasons for the "no" vote included that more highly educated persons were tending to 'yes', while good honest hardworking people were suspicious that the whole thing was some sort of elitist plot being foisted on them by politicians that they didn't like in the first place, and was a backlash against a media they didn't trust. Adding them to the voters who simply didn't want to ditch the Queen ...
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 5158
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

usermame wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
Maybe when Queenie goes, we can appoint Harry president for life. He needs a job, and anyway, he's not really a Windsor.
Well the Windsors aren't really Windsors are they?
He's not a member of the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha family, either.
User avatar
usermame
Posts: 5225
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Te Ika a Maui

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by usermame »

shanky wrote:
usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
Well at least there’s onecountry that has it all together, Yeah?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
;) ;)
Taiwan?
User avatar
shanky
Posts: 20717
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by shanky »

usermame wrote:
shanky wrote:
usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
Well at least there’s onecountry that has it all together, Yeah?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
;) ;)
Taiwan?
Sure. If you like

I just didn’t want you to think your efforts had gone un-noticed.
User avatar
Pat the Ex Mat
Posts: 5890
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:50 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Pat the Ex Mat »

Ellafan wrote:
Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
Ellafan wrote:
President Scomo?
You well know that isn't the Republican model we're discussing

The North shore really is Little England
More to the point, the North shore isn't the inner city - if you read the AEC statistical report on the referendum, A very interesting pattern emerges.

The inner city areas of Sydney and Melbourne were the only places where the yes vote got up. In the outer suburbs, other state capital cities, and rural areas the no vote prevailed. No won 55% to 45%, an additionally no state voted yes.

Basically, the majority of the electorate viewed the whole thing as some elitist inner city trendy thing. ;)

https://www.aec.gov.au/Elections/refere ... tatistics/
Apart from the fact I'm talking about now, not 1999 :lol: :lol:

And I say that as a paid up member of the Australian Republican Movement.
User avatar
Auckman
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Sydney Town

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Auckman »

Enzedder wrote:
usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
Yes, it's terrifying. And then we have uber cunts like Hosking.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mik ... advantage/

He should do his show from Melbourne.
His Mrs this morning was bordering offensive with some of her discussion points. I am waiting for one of them to out and out blame labour for the whole virus.
That whole station is a disgrace. I saw some people on fb calling it NatmobZB but surely some Nats should be ashamed of the kind of stuff those wankers are spewing on talkback.
User avatar
Auckman
Posts: 9259
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Sydney Town

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Auckman »

Pat the Ex Mat wrote:
Farva wrote: Ella fan has posted utter nonsense.
But of course :idea:

Re Head of State, I prefer the French model
A very interesting but quite complicated system in my mind. However, given the fragmentation of the political spectrum in places like Germany, Spain, and of course Italy, maybe the French system is a good one to get over the deadlock of multi-party coalitions.
User avatar
Cullen
Posts: 1824
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The Shipwreck Coast

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Cullen »

Any tips from Kiwis?

The Mrs and I are going to quit booze for 6 weeks, set up a home gym and get a home exercise routine going. Should have benefits for the long term too.

Had just started an ocean swimming beginners training program so a bit pissed off that is gone. Not sure if I should wait 6 weeks to resume pool training or get a wetsuit and go straight to the ocean.
User avatar
Flockwitt
Posts: 6586
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Flockwitt »

Cullen wrote:Any tips from Kiwis?

The Mrs and I are going to quit booze for 6 weeks, set up a home gym and get a home exercise routine going. Should have benefits for the long term too.

Had just started an ocean swimming beginners training program so a bit pissed off that is gone. Not sure if I should wait 6 weeks to resume pool training or get a wetsuit and go straight to the ocean.
Get in extra booze, a good couch, upgrade your internet and online entertainment services, have a pantry full of munching snacks and make yourself comfortable.
User avatar
jdogscoop
Posts: 13743
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by jdogscoop »

I'm pretty much taking the Flockwitt route though making the most of that daily one hour outdoor exercise allowance to offset the obvious effects.
User avatar
usermame
Posts: 5225
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Te Ika a Maui

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by usermame »

shanky wrote:
usermame wrote:
shanky wrote: Well at least there’s onecountry that has it all together, Yeah?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
;) ;)
Taiwan?
Sure. If you like

I just didn’t want you to think your efforts had gone un-noticed.
Really? It seems to me my efforts to boost the power of the collective have hit the brick wall of rugged individualism. Oh well.
User avatar
Norman Harvey
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:55 pm

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Norman Harvey »

Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
Long live scomo
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 4595
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Ellafan wrote:
Clogs wrote:So here we are now discussing the merits/failings of a referendum vote for an Australian Republic from 1999. On a thread about the Coroanvirus and Melbourne.

Aaah, PR don't ever change.
Maybe when Queenie goes, we can appoint Harry president for life. He needs a job, and anyway, he's not really a Windsor.
Ginger.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 4595
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Adelaide. Fvcked.






















By. Melbourne. 50 points.
User avatar
Sensible Stephen
Posts: 3001
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Sensible Stephen »

Clogs wrote:Adelaide. Fvcked.


By. Melbourne. 50 points.
You cnuts have actually given us two clusters. :x 8 active cases now. 0 new ones yesterday so fingers crossed its under-control and contained.

Mass panic the last two days as a result. 10,000 people got tested in 2 days. :shock: :lol:
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 17429
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

Went to my supermarket today and the shelves were all stocked.
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 17429
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

471 new cases today anticipated, so that is somewhat promising.
We wont have seen the effects of the stage 4 yet so hopefully in a week or two that will really drop.
The Australian claiming they have seen data and modelling that suggests it will get to 1200 cases a day and not drop until the end of August. Im hoping that is wrong.
User avatar
Ted.
Posts: 17625
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ted. »

shanky wrote:
usermame wrote:
shanky wrote:
usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
Well at least there’s onecountry that has it all together, Yeah?

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
;) ;)
Taiwan?
Sure. If you like

I just didn’t want you to think your efforts had gone un-noticed.
The thing is, our health system is no better, probably worse, than most western countries; our ability to track and trace, while better now, is still below par; our retirement villages and aged care facilities are still employing the same help in the same facilities. So, without a stringent and successful lockdown, we're as f**ked as the next f**ked place. Getting that across to the quarantine hoppers and open-it-up crowd hasn't be so successful that everyone is now pulling together and we can kick back and relax while enjoying the fruits of our labour.
User avatar
Sensible Stephen
Posts: 3001
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Sensible Stephen »

Farva wrote:471 new cases today anticipated, so that is somewhat promising.
We wont have seen the effects of the stage 4 yet so hopefully in a week or two that will really drop.
The Australian claiming they have seen data and modelling that suggests it will get to 1200 cases a day and not drop until the end of August. Im hoping that is wrong.
Yeah I read that while level 4 will stop the current clusters from infecting new people, they still have to run their course. The current clusters will probably take another 1 to 2 weeks to to play out.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 4595
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Sensible Stephen wrote:
Farva wrote:471 new cases today anticipated, so that is somewhat promising.
We wont have seen the effects of the stage 4 yet so hopefully in a week or two that will really drop.
The Australian claiming they have seen data and modelling that suggests it will get to 1200 cases a day and not drop until the end of August. Im hoping that is wrong.
Yeah I read that while level 4 will stop the current clusters from infecting new people, they still have to run their course. The current clusters will probably take another 1 to 2 weeks to to play out.

I am struggling to understand this. We are past the 3 week mark for stage 3. And stage 3 was effective at getting the R down below one. But it hasn't this time? What hasn't worked?
User avatar
guy smiley
Posts: 33228
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: in transit

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by guy smiley »

usermame wrote:
Enzedder wrote:In one way the problems in Melbourne could be a lifesaver for us as NZ has been totally blase about any precautions. This is providing us with the wakeup call we needed - possible the same in other Oz states as well.
I know, it's been explained enough times, but I'm still gobsmacked countries can contemplate enduring a pandemic without a national strategy. Baffling.
I think the same when I look at NZ’s District Health Board set up and wonder the the f**k they could have been able or allowed to pursue individual standards regarding testing and treating for a global pandemic...

Right?
User avatar
guy smiley
Posts: 33228
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: in transit

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by guy smiley »

Clogs wrote:
Sensible Stephen wrote:
Farva wrote:471 new cases today anticipated, so that is somewhat promising.
We wont have seen the effects of the stage 4 yet so hopefully in a week or two that will really drop.
The Australian claiming they have seen data and modelling that suggests it will get to 1200 cases a day and not drop until the end of August. Im hoping that is wrong.
Yeah I read that while level 4 will stop the current clusters from infecting new people, they still have to run their course. The current clusters will probably take another 1 to 2 weeks to to play out.

I am struggling to understand this. We are past the 3 week mark for stage 3. And stage 3 was effective at getting the R down below one. But it hasn't this time? What hasn't worked?
Dickheads.

Sovereign Citizens and the concerted campaign from media to discredit the Premier. The virus is a hoax, do your research, follow the money, sheeple.
User avatar
Slim 293
Posts: 5797
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Straya plum

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Slim 293 »

guy smiley wrote:
Clogs wrote:
Sensible Stephen wrote:
Farva wrote:471 new cases today anticipated, so that is somewhat promising.
We wont have seen the effects of the stage 4 yet so hopefully in a week or two that will really drop.
The Australian claiming they have seen data and modelling that suggests it will get to 1200 cases a day and not drop until the end of August. Im hoping that is wrong.
Yeah I read that while level 4 will stop the current clusters from infecting new people, they still have to run their course. The current clusters will probably take another 1 to 2 weeks to to play out.

I am struggling to understand this. We are past the 3 week mark for stage 3. And stage 3 was effective at getting the R down below one. But it hasn't this time? What hasn't worked?
Dickheads.

Sovereign Citizens and the concerted campaign from media to discredit the Premier. The virus is a hoax, do your research, follow the money, sheeple.

Dictator Dan.

UN Charter of Human Rights.

Wearing a face mask is the equivalent of drinking your own urine. *

Wake up!

* a recent favourite from random Dr Homeopath
User avatar
JPNZ
Posts: 2307
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:58 am
Location: Christchurch NZ

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by JPNZ »

Clogs wrote:
I am struggling to understand this. We are past the 3 week mark for stage 3. And stage 3 was effective at getting the R down below one. But it hasn't this time? What hasn't worked?
Purely and simply its numbers.. Around 30th June when Victoria dipped back into level 3 there were around 300 odd active cases, Yesterday when level 4 was enacted there were 6500 active cases. I believe Victoria should have moved to level 4 in the 1st or 2nd week of July.

The daily increases in early July were only going one way, instead its looking more and more likely Victoria could potentially be under level 4 restrictions till late October or early November. All hindsight of course but dig in for a long one.
Post Reply