Society/Culture Has Australia developed a social sickness? Or has it always been this way?

[Evolved1]

Suicides and Traffic Fatalities aren't contagious.

Imagine how bad the Flu would be without any vaccines available for it though, and FYI the COVID-19 related deaths are now up to ~ 82,000. Rapidly catching up to the influenza there.

They're preventable though.

Balancing individual freedoms with the collective good isn't a new idea. We've just moved too far to the other extreme in this instance.

My money is on COVID-19 overtaking influenza on the league ladder of preventable deaths in this calendar year. It reminds me of the good ole days when being an Essendon supporter was a reason for optimism...anyway, moving on.

I'm interested to see how the race for a COVID-19 vaccine develops. If it mutates much like influenza virus strains do, that will throw a spanner in the works.

 

[Evolved1]

Herd immunity strategy would require 35,000 ICU beds JUST FOR COVID patients. <---see modelling
We have 2200 ICU beds, with plans to get to ~7000 ICU. <---- see CMO's statements
Not only will THOUSANDS of CoVid patients die unnecessarily, but thousands of other people with other illnesses will die unnecessarily. <--- see modelling
How many of the dead do you think will be healthcare professionals?



What do you think the social, mental health and social liberties cost will be for this herd immunity strategy?

You wanna kill tens of thousands of people, including health professionals, for no reason other than staying at home is too hard for you.
F me you are soft.

There is a cost to any strategy we take. I'm picking what I consider the lesser of two evils. If you're going to pin 30,000 deaths on me, it's reasonable to assume you'll take responsibility for the implications of placing Australia in 18 months of lockdown. The suicides, destroyed families, financial ruin, depression and other psychological disorders, lost jobs, loss of social liberties.

Geez you really are a heartless individual.

Why can't we provide sufficient PPE for healthcare professionals? It seems like an easily rectifiable problem.

 

[mouncey2franklin]

What do you make of this new story?

Man in Perth hotel quarantine in a coma after nine-hour wait to go to hospital

Others in coronavirus quarantine across Australia say they are also struggling to access adequate medical care

www.theguardian.com

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

There is a cost to any strategy we take. I'm picking what I consider the lesser of two evils. If you're going to pin 30,000 deaths on me, it's reasonable to assume you'll take responsibility for the implications of placing Australia in 18 months of lockdown. The suicides, destroyed families, financial ruin, depression and other psychological disorders, lost jobs, loss of social liberties.

Geez you really are a heartless individual.

Why can't we provide sufficient PPE for healthcare professionals? It seems like an easily rectifiable problem.

You don't think that a pandemic potentially infecting 50-60% of Australia would cause similar levels of economic devastation, societal distortion and psychological disorders? Like, do you seriously think that people still would have gone down the street to buy coffee if they had to walk past rows of army trucks being loaded with coffins as was seen in Lombardy?

Because before these measures were put in place, that's where we were heading.

 

[Number37]

There is a cost to any strategy we take. I'm picking what I consider the lesser of two evils. If you're going to pin 30,000 deaths on me, it's reasonable to assume you'll take responsibility for the implications of placing Australia in 18 months of lockdown. The suicides, destroyed families, financial ruin, depression and other psychological disorders, lost jobs, loss of social liberties.

Geez you really are a heartless individual.

Why can't we provide sufficient PPE for healthcare professionals? It seems like an easily rectifiable problem.

All the other things in your rant are just a smokescreen for your whinge about the "loss of social liberties".
You don't give a F about suicides or destroyed families or PPE for healthcare workers.

Waa-waaa-waa mah social liberties.
Soft.

 

[Evolved1]

You don't think that a pandemic potentially infecting 50-60% of Australia would cause similar levels of economic devastation, societal distortion and psychological disorders? Like, do you seriously think that people still would have gone down the street to buy coffee if they had to walk past rows of army trucks being loaded with coffins as was seen in Lombardy?

Because before these measures were put in place, that's where we were heading.

I don't.

If you can accept 30,000 casualties while life goes on largely as usual, I think the damage can be mitigated. In a population of 25 million, that's 0.12%.

Who comprises that 0.12%? For the most part, people who are already on their last legs. Btw, I think older people should stay in lockdown for their own good.

From a purely mathematical perspective, let's assume that everyone loses 18 months of their life being locked in as opposed to 0.12% losing an average of 10 years of life, and it's fairly even. When you add in the financial devastation, social implications, loss of 3/4 yr of schooling, it's not even close afaic.

I don't expect everyone to agree with my reasoning. I would like a choice though, with everyone taking accountability for their choice. I'll take my chances with the virus if my opponents here will take responsibility for their choices, especially the financial implications.

 

[Evolved1]

All the other things in your rant are just a smokescreen for your whinge about the "loss of social liberties".
You don't give a F about suicides or destroyed families or PPE for healthcare workers.

Waa-waaa-waa mah social liberties.
Soft.

You're hilarious.

Not quite at the level as the guy who said I wanted to see Islamic women beheaded, so there's still plenty of room for improvement.

 

[Number37]

You're hilarious.

You might have Munchausen Syndrome.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

I don't.

If you can accept 30,000 casualties while life goes on largely as usual, I think the damage can be mitigated. In a population of 25 million, that's 0.12%.

Who comprises that 0.12%? For the most part, people who are already on their last legs. Btw, I think older people should stay in lockdown for their own good.

From a purely mathematical perspective, let's assume that everyone loses 18 months of their life being locked in as opposed to 0.12% losing an average of 10 years of life, and it's fairly even. When you add in the financial devastation, social implications, loss of 3/4 yr of schooling, it's not even close afaic.

I don't expect everyone to agree with my reasoning. I would like a choice though, with everyone taking accountability for their choice. I'll take my chances with the virus if my opponents here will take responsibility for their choices, especially the financial implications.

I don't agree with your reasoning because you're not being realistic about what an unchecked pandemic will look like.

Let's unpack those numbers you're talking about. 30,000 casualties with an optimistic death rate of 2% correlates to 1.5 million cases. 1.5 million cases in a country of 25 million is 6% of the population succumbing to infection at some point in the future. How and why you've come up with these numbers is a mystery to me; there seems to be pretty universal agreement that the likely impact of Covid-19 left to run unchecked without any mitigation methods is approximately half the population contracting the virus overall. That's closer to 15 million cases and using the 2% assumption, that's 300,000 deaths.

It's highly questionable whether the low death rate seen in Australia would actually apply in a country where the health system is being hopelessly overwhelmed by the virus. For example, in Italy and Spain (both highly developed countries that acted way too late in stemming the spread, the death toll is closer to 10%. Using that figure, that's 1.5 million people in Australia dead; over 1/20th of the population.

So if you want to be serious about weighing up what the real impacts are for the government mandated restrictions vis a vis the virus itself, start by plugging in those numbers to your analysis first.

I would like a choice though, with everyone taking accountability for their choice. I'll take my chances with the virus if my opponents here will take responsibility for their choices, especially the financial implications.

This is a dodgy offer; obviously you're incapable of taking accountability for your ability to spread the virus in sense that you'll be spreading it before you even know you're infected. The social distancing rules aren't just here to protect you, they're designed to protect everybody else from you at the same time.

 

[Evolved1]

I don't agree with your reasoning because you're not being realistic about what an unchecked pandemic will look like.

When did I say I wanted it left unchecked?

I've already posted on this thread that older people should keep themselves isolated. I also conditionally support anyone who wants to stay isolated from work to do so. I support social distancing measures as well. My position isn't as black and white as you're making it out to be.

I'm not going to play strawman purely for the convenience of your arguments.

Let's unpack those numbers you're talking about. 30,000 casualties with an optimistic death rate of 2% correlates to 1.5 million cases. 1.5 million cases in a country of 25 million is 6% of the population succumbing to infection at some point in the future. How and why you've come up with these numbers is a mystery to me; there seems to be pretty universal agreement that the likely impact of Covid-19 left to run unchecked without any mitigation methods is approximately half the population contracting the virus overall. That's closer to 15 million cases and using the 2% assumption, that's 300,000 deaths.

I'm happy to argue over whether a 2% death rate is optimistic. I suggest you start a thread based purely on that stat. I can't think of an easier win.

It's highly questionable whether the low death rate seen in Australia would actually apply in a country where the health system is being hopelessly overwhelmed by the virus. For example, in Italy and Spain (both highly developed countries that acted way too late in stemming the spread, the death toll is closer to 10%. Using that figure, that's 1.5 million people in Australia dead; over 1/20th of the population.

So if you want to be serious about weighing up what the real impacts are for the government mandated restrictions vis a vis the virus itself, start by plugging in those numbers to your analysis first.

My argument is purely for an Australian audience on an Australian forum. There are variables related to other nations that aren't important to our discussion.

This is a dodgy offer; obviously you're incapable of taking accountability for your ability to spread the virus in sense that you'll be spreading it before you even know you're infected. The social distancing rules aren't just here to protect you, they're designed to protect everybody else from you at the same time.

I didn't say I wasn't following government guidelines regarding social distancing. How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[Evolved1]

You might have Munchausen Syndrome.

I love amateur psychology; the last bastion of the intellectually destitute.

 

[Number37]

I love amateur psychology...

...the last bastion of the intellectually destitute.

Sounds like you're saying that you're intellectually destitute.

 

[Evolved1]

Sounds like you're saying that you're intellectually destitute.

That's a first. I can't remember anyone splitting one of my posts in half before replying to both halves as one.

What are you, 12? You're such easy game that I feel guilty insulting you.

 

[Number37]

That's a first. I can't remember anyone splitting one of my posts in half before replying to both halves as one.

What are you, 12? You're such easy game that I feel guilty insulting you.

You said you loved it.
You called it the last bastion of the intellectually destitute.

Please correct the record if you didn't write those 2 things.

 

[Evolved1]

You said you loved it.
You called it the last bastion of the intellectually destitute.

Please correct the record if you didn't write those 2 things.

I find your posts hilariously moronic. No correction is required.

Keep the comedy coming.

 

[Number37]

No correction is required.

Are you familiar with derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr?

 

[Evolved1]

Are you familiar with derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr?

There's a level of stupidity I'm willing to tolerate.

Congratulations, it's not easy to get on my ignore list. Your parents must be proud.

 

[Number37]

There's a level of stupidity I'm willing to tolerate.

Congratulations, it's not easy to get on my ignore list. Your parents must be proud.

Oh no, poor me, Evolved1 isn't going to reply to my posts with banal crap.
How will I cope?

 

[Frank Bunn]

I don't.

If you can accept 30,000 casualties while life goes on largely as usual, I think the damage can be mitigated. In a population of 25 million, that's 0.12%.

Who comprises that 0.12%? For the most part, people who are already on their last legs. Btw, I think older people should stay in lockdown for their own good.

From a purely mathematical perspective, let's assume that everyone loses 18 months of their life being locked in as opposed to 0.12% losing an average of 10 years of life, and it's fairly even. When you add in the financial devastation, social implications, loss of 3/4 yr of schooling, it's not even close afaic.

I don't expect everyone to agree with my reasoning. I would like a choice though, with everyone taking accountability for their choice. I'll take my chances with the virus if my opponents here will take responsibility for their choices, especially the financial implications.

I don't think we should be able to make totally individual choices about the virus as it can affect others. But for something that is dominating our lives and curtailing our rights in an unprecedented way I find it very strange that there is no meaningful political debate occurring in this country on these topics. It's all about lockdown, stay home etc but with no explanation of how these ever more restrictive policies will get us out of this, what is the timeframe and what the economic cost will be.

Victoria is currently being governed by an 8 person committee without parliamentary scrutiny and with no limit to their powers over the citizens. There is no parliamentary debate, no question time and no opposition to keep this self appointed executive accountable. All we have is the media shaming the police when they get too heavy handed - but this is a very long way from how a democratic system of government is supposed to work.

 

[mouncey2franklin]

But for something that is dominating our lives and curtailing our rights in an unprecedented way I find it very strange that there is no meaningful political debate occurring in this country on these topics. It's all about lockdown, stay home etc but with no explanation of how these ever more restrictive policies will get us out of this, what is the timeframe and what the economic cost will be.

It is bizarre to say the least. I learned during the 2001 / War on Terror thing that when people are in fear, they lose all sense of objectivity.

But I didn't know it was this bad. It is as though all of the sensible people have been paralysed by fear, either of the virus itself, or of opprobrium for others if they dare speak out.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

When did I say I wanted it left unchecked?

I've already posted on this thread that older people should keep themselves isolated. I also conditionally support anyone who wants to stay isolated from work to do so. I support social distancing measures as well. My position isn't as black and white as you're making it out to be.

I'm not going to play strawman purely for the convenience of your arguments.

You specifically said you wanted life to "largely continue as normal" while bemoaning the lockdown. It seems to be quite clear that you don't want a lockdown of any sort, but you somehow personally forecast the total case loads and deaths from your plan of action being in line with that the federal government has forecast with the lockdown. Therefore, whatever you would like to happen is not realistic in what you think it will achieve.

At any rate your position isn't black and white mostly because you're shifting your stance around as it suits, but somehow you're making that out to be my problem which is quite funny.

I'm happy to argue over whether a 2% death rate is optimistic. I suggest you start a thread based purely on that stat. I can't think of an easier win.

My argument is purely for an Australian audience on an Australian forum. There are variables related to other nations that aren't important to our discussion.

Many large and wealthy western countries have death tolls approaching 10% of case load, I have no idea how you reconcile that statistic into a "win" for a 2% death rate. As with the above paragraph, you're not being realistic at all. Your argument is based on Australian conditions at the present and you cannot comprehend how bad things can get, despite countless examples being broadcast to you on every medium of news at the moment.

Back in January or even February, no experts predicted a 10% death toll in Italy. But here we are.

I didn't say I wasn't following government guidelines regarding social distancing. How did you come to that conclusion?

Where did I say you weren't? Why are you being so tedious? Is this normal for you? Can you not do that?

 

[Run n Spread]

It is bizarre to say the least. I learned during the 2001 / War on Terror thing that when people are in fear, they lose all sense of objectivity.

But I didn't know it was this bad. It is as though all of the sensible people have been paralysed by fear, either of the virus itself, or of opprobrium for others if they dare speak out.

And whipped up by national frenzy and patriotism to do the right thing. History repeats. Probably the same in WW1 with the white feathers. Plenty probably thought it was stupid but fought out of obligation.
I think also people shift responsibility. If the government said restrictions off it would take 5 mins to suddenly have crowds forming rather then self isolating.

 

[Evolved1]

I don't think we should be able to make totally individual choices about the virus as it can affect others. But for something that is dominating our lives and curtailing our rights in an unprecedented way I find it very strange that there is no meaningful political debate occurring in this country on these topics. It's all about lockdown, stay home etc but with no explanation of how these ever more restrictive policies will get us out of this, what is the timeframe and what the economic cost will be.

Victoria is currently being governed by an 8 person committee without parliamentary scrutiny and with no limit to their powers over the citizens. There is no parliamentary debate, no question time and no opposition to keep this self appointed executive accountable. All we have is the media shaming the police when they get too heavy handed - but this is a very long way from how a democratic system of government is supposed to work.

The economic cost will be devastating if we follow through with the current state of affairs until a vaccine is available. The timeframe for a vaccine is optimistically estimated to be 18 months. By devastating, I'd say the economic cost will likely be unparalleled by anything since the great depression. Economists would be able to provide more specifics.

A lot of the current measures are bullshit. There's no added risk by having people attend the beach, sit on a park bench, or going for a long drive.

Don't forget that individual choices surrounding the common flu also affect others, and people die frequently because of the flu. The current level of response is completely out of proportion to the threat.

 

[Evolved1]

You specifically said you wanted life to "largely continue as normal" while bemoaning the lockdown. It seems to be quite clear that you don't want a lockdown of any sort, but you somehow personally forecast the total case loads and deaths from your plan of action being in line with that the federal government has forecast with the lockdown. Therefore, whatever you would like to happen is not realistic in what you think it will achieve.

At any rate your position isn't black and white mostly because you're shifting your stance around as it suits, but somehow you're making that out to be my problem which is quite funny.


Many large and wealthy western countries have death tolls approaching 10% of case load, I have no idea how you reconcile that statistic into a "win" for a 2% death rate. As with the above paragraph, you're not being realistic at all. Your argument is based on Australian conditions at the present and you cannot comprehend how bad things can get, despite countless examples being broadcast to you on every medium of news at the moment.
;
Back in January or even February, no experts predicted a 10% death toll in Italy. But here we are.


Where did I say you weren't? Why are you being so tedious? Is this normal for you? Can you not do that?

I was going by memory that 35k deaths was an early estimate though I can't find the link. I could be completely off-base there. In saying that, your stats are highly misleading. Given the lack of testing, especially in respect to asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic carriers, there is a zero chance that the death rate is close to 10% in Italy or any other nation.

I'm in favour of closing our international borders and having a mandatory self-isolation at home period for a limited number of people who are at a high risk of infecting others.

For everyone else, I'd give a choice. Work from home if the option is available, go back to your place of employment if it's not, or (for those who feel uncomfortable returning to work) stay at home and be given a dole payment that will accrue as debt to be paid back incrementally when you return to your paid vocation.

Open up the gyms, restaurants and churches. Let people have their freedom, and that includes the freedom to stay at home.

I've provided a solution here, whether you approve or not, and that's vastly more than the fans of endless quarantine have given. How do you see this playing out over the next 2 years?

 

[Mr Blicavs]

As we know, Australians returning from overseas are being put into quarantine in hotels for fourteen days, at the cost of the government.

This began a few days ago and now we are reading reports of unpleasant conditions in the hotels:

Lack of fresh air, poor food options, some people are allowed to receive care packages while others are not.

In fact it is being reported that many of these people cannot access ubereats or similar.

They are forced to make do with whatever crap the hotel provides.

It sounds like a complete shitshow to be honest.

And remember, these are Australian citizens who have committed no crimes.

They have done nothing wrong and are being placed under hotel-arrest for two weeks.

Many people think this is fair enough, to stop the virus, flatten the curve, fight the pandemic, we're all in this together, etc etc etc.

But I noticed in the comments section of an article in The Age that the majority of respondents had zero sympathy for the people now stuck in these conditions.

Many of them seemed to be taking delight in that fact that their fellow Australians are being treated like criminals.

See the comments for yourself:

Three microwave meals and no snacks: Travellers resort to stealing food as hotel allowances cut

For hotels where guests in quarantine had an extra allowance, many were using the funds to purchase alcohol.

www.theage.com.au

For example:

Spoilt bunch, un-appreciative. There are people in the world who go without food during this crisis. Maybe it is good time for you to do some soul searching and see how you can contribute to the less fortunate.
-Ann

Move them to Christmas Island so they can try out those accommodations so they can then see how good they currently have it
-Dave

Human likes to complain about anything under the sun.
You’re not on a holiday, you need to be quarantine in the hotel to protect yourself and your families in case you contracted with the virus.
-Callum

A 14 day diet, sounds good to me
-Tone Def

On and on it goes.

To be fair, there are plenty of sympathetic comments in there as well. And for all we know, the vindictive comments may be coming from agitators to stir the pot.

However I do know that in real life, from my experience, there is a nasty attitude among many Australians, not merely a lack of sympathy, but a certain inherent schadenfreude.

Has it always been this way? Or are things getting worse with every passing year?

The most Millenial post ive ever seen...