This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Economic implications of a SARS/Coronavirus outbreak

Jump to new

7% of the population is about 4.6 mil. So 4 mil, no problemo virus has little effect, 1 in 8 though, problemo.
 

See, this is a good example of your disgusting attitude coming through. You continually show no care for the huge numbers of people suffering and dying. You shrug them off as unimportant or deny their existence entirely, but hypocritically you accuse someone else of being uncaring if they want to make the world as good a place as possible for the most people possible.

It does not make sense to actively harm millions of people to protect a very small number of people. You are the one who does not care about those people, which you demonstrate by dismissing them as unimportant or their suffering/death non existent. I on the other hand acknowledge the whole situation and want what is best for the most possible people. If anyone here is heartless it's you, though I suspect it's more that you are just ignorant and suffering from tunnel vision.


What attitude towards dedicated people? I have nothing but respect for the people who are doing what they can to help people. What is bad is that the media cherry picks things, takes them out of context, paints them as the whole picture, and then people like you are successfully manipulated.

I've had enough of you. Pi$$ off.
Click to expand...

The irony of this statement... But, it does demonstrate your hypocrisy and general attitude nicely.
 

Really, you are stupid, just use the ignore button. No need to make accusations that are incorrect, as I am the most uncaring creature towards people who cannot accept reality, life and death, which SIR is you.

Remember : IGNORE button
 
And can we get this discussion back onto the topic please or I will have to ask Joe to bring in a 4 year old to administer?
 
Never piss off a single generation especially when it control the money..
Junior post is valid aka melbourne and stress due not to deaths..irrelevant numbers at this stage...but at the extra pressure due to isolations of both patients and meds
But i really doubt there is much pressure elsewhere..
But all is good: fake vaccine coming, mandatory innoculation to ensure we can not compare both vaccinated/ non vaccinated population outcomes.
CSL up and up as expected and discussed in the RESET thread
 
Note covid deaths are concentrated in hospitals setup to treat the virus not spread across the nation as per normal mortality rates.

A small number of front line health works are copping this everyday in Victoria, these very people (legendary heroes) are risking their lives everyday along with their families for the better good of all.

And then they are accused of propaganda.
 

You have second hand knowledge, as do I. I have several friends who are nurses and one who is a senior medical practioner/advisor who routinely travels to a large number of hospitals.

Some individuals are obviously under pressure, but that's nothing unusual for people in hospitals.

Again, here's a summary:

If less people than usual are dying, it makes no sense to paint the overall picture as 'Extraordinary, unprecendented deaths causing overall grief to the overall medical community'.

When the vast majority of the very small number of people dying are elderly people from nursing homes, and they are always routinely dying, it doesn't make sense to paint the picture as something other than this.

I have friends who are nurses who have told me first hand stories about people dying at work that day, and being upset about it. That's nothing new. Hundreds of people die in Australia every day and many millions around the world. Every day. Most of them elderly. We now have less people than usual dying (it's marginal, call it normal) and the vast majority of people dying of the virus are elderly (the others are almost all cancer patients etc, and deaths from cancer etc aren't new either by the way).

The stories of grief from the healthcare workers are no doubt mostly genuine, but it is nothing new. These genuine stories are not propaganda when they're told to me by my friend or your associates of whatever relationship to you. They are propaganda when the media propagates them and demonstrates them as something extraordinary, often with exaggeration. It is propaganda because it is designed to give them deliberate implication that there is far more death than usual (there's marginally less) and that healthcare workers generally don't have to deal with death and suffering, at least to anything like this extent. The implication is that we have a phenomenal amount of extra death, when this is not remotely true.
 
satanoperca said:
And can we get this discussion back onto the topic please or I will have to ask Joe to bring in a 4 year old to administer?
Click to expand...

Sure if people want to accept facts.

The economic consequences of the Trump/USA approach to covid is a 32% reduction in GDP.

The economic consequences of Australia's approach is 10% reduction in GDP over the same period (links in a previous post).

Where would you rather live ?
 

No one is accusing them of creating propaganda. As I said, their stories are mostly genuine. The misrepresentations of those stories are the propaganda. The media and government are responsible for that, not the healthcare workers. The media and government aren't putting their lives on the line or suffering etc.
 

That's the most absurd comparison you could have come up with. Do you have any idea what a confounding variable is? You have plenty of them there. Do you have any idea what cherry picking is? You're very guilty of it here.

You could cherry pick to make the reverse argument, and far more easily.
 
So the economy is in a holding pattern waiting for a vaccine, questions remain about how harmful the vaccine will be or how foreign actors will use the gullible to sow doubt about the vaccines.

Hope everyone understands the amount of people already injected with the testing for vaccines before its released to not only see if it creates an adverse reaction in the patient but also to see if the bodies response is showing an effect defence against the virus.
This is all done quite early in the testing stages.

Just saying the obvious.......
 

You want a statement of the obvious?

Okay, despite no evidence of mysterious afteraffects popping up from the virus, and it being a coronavirus respiratory infection (which people get literally billions of times every year), people are extremely concerned about it and it's one of the main arguments used against saying "The vast majority of people exposed to it don't get significant symptoms and the vast majority of the few who do get significant symptoms make complete recoveries", we have people saying we have to push a vaccine through quickly.

Vaccines are normally developed over many many years. In this case people are wanting literally billions of people, ideally the entire world population, injected with a vaccine which would be produced without the usual safety protocols used to ensure a vaccine is safe and won't cause damage.

We literally know what the virus does because like it or not, we already have tens of millions of documented cases and no evidence of mystery issues popping up later and nothing to suggest they will. We know a vaccine can't logistically be given to everyone anyway and we know that it's extraordinarily unlikely to be particularly effective, and we also know that without the normal period of testing we can't be sure it's safe, which is why in all cases in the history of the planet we've spent years, usually many years, testing them.
 

That is something that will never be accepted. Doesn't fit the narrative.
 
Knobby22 said:
That is something that will never be accepted. Doesn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

Are you for real? You honestly take your stance and can somehow say that facts are being omitted because they don't fit the narrative?

You honestly can't see that you're the one following the narrative and that your narrative is the one conveniently omitting critical facts?
 

You (and many others) are saying we should just let it spread to reduce the impact on the economy. (That is the narrative)

It hasn't worked.
Brazil has had to cut its iron output, USA is a mess, while most of Australia is doing pretty good except for Victoria due to government stuff ups. South Korea's economy, Norway, Taiwan,etc. all going strong.

A vaccine is looking closer so it looks like the countries that have treated it seriously are going to do a lot better. Better economies, better after effects (little post Covid syndrome).

It doesn't matter how deadly it is in the end, what matters is peoples reactions and if they are too scared, the effect is the same.
 

You're cherry picking and misrepresenting here.

I'm not saying do nothing. As I've said, I like what Sweden did. Bizarrely, people here have pointed out to me that Sweden didn't do nothing. I'm saying do nothing extreme. Don't infringe on civil liberties. Don't shut businesses (obviously within reason - if something is extraordinarily risky such as requiring people to squeeze into physical contact in large groups or whatever, then it is reasonable to stop that specifically).

Your cherry picked cases ignore the fact that you could cherry pick to display the opposite of your claims.

It doesn't matter how deadly it is in the end, what matters is peoples reactions and if they are too scared, the effect is the same.
Click to expand...

This is partially true, which is why I have been so against the scare propaganda, as you'll have seen in this thread this afternoon. Using the death of a small number of elderly people from nursing homes to terrify the entire population and justify shutting down businesses and removing peoples' human rights is insane.
 

Your argument makes sense only if you're seeing that some level of virus, lockdowns and so on is a desirable thing.

My argument is based upon having zero of either.

Had we shut the borders when the problem first became apparent overseas, the challenge faced by Melbourne and Sydney would have been no greater than the problem dealt with in remote areas. No cases, just don't let any in, done.

Once we brought the virus into the country, that's when lockdowns etc became necessary to try and control it but you don't need any of that if you don't have a virus here in the first place.

Given the problem was known to exist overseas, that was the time to shut the borders and implement proper quarantine for any returning residents. Instead we still had flights and cruise ships arriving even as the problem was headline news.

Once the virus was in the community, that's comparable to the first spark which leads to the bushfire. That's the point where the nightmare begins and it's the point you ideally want to avoid if at all possible. Perhaps it may already have been too late at that point but it's at least plausible that it wasn't given the lack of known cases in Australia at the time.

If the only problem we had was a lack of international travel well then that wouldn't be great but it would be drastically better than the situation we actually have right now. A purely economic problem that could be at least partially worked around by encouraging Australians to travel domestically versus lockdowns.

We could have given every worker two weeks' extra leave on the condition that they travel at least 200km from home for that period and stay at a commercially operated hotel, motel, caravan park etc. Split the cost of that two weeks between business and government - both would have taken a bit of a hit but been drastically better off than what we've ended up with and it would have worked around much of the economic problems of the international cut-off.

I know which I'd rather.
 
Last edited:
Smurf1976 said:
Instead we still had flights and cruise ships arriving even as the problem was headline news.
Click to expand...

Nailed it there.

The Ruby Princess fiasco was the start of it all. If we hadn't let people off and instead turned the ship into a floating quarantine centre, then things may have been a lot different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
WEF corrupts countries
Replies
6
Views
367
SirRumpole
Trump Era 2025-2029 : Stock and Economic Comment
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
5K
Smurf1976
US Election 2024 : Stock and Economic Comment
7 8 9
Replies
171
Views
10K
divs4ever
M
Cooling Australian Property Market Signals Economic Trends
Replies
1
Views
1K
Joe Blow
Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
571
Smurf1976
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...