COVID-19 Stuff Here

[formerflanker]

In reality FF (Folau Fainga'a), any public official making those sorts of decisions would be acting in excess of their powers and responsibilities.

In 2005 Queensland introduced the Public Health Act which gave the Chief Health Officer a range of powers. It is under that Act that the CHO is currently making directions such as "restricting the movement of persons" and "requiring persons to stay at or in a certain place".
Don't forget the Premier's statement "It's not my decision".
The Brisbane Times says [Queensland] will also renew Dr Young's sweeping emergency powers for another 90 days, with the current period set to expire this week.

 

[formerflanker]

Curious FF (Folau Fainga'a), do you make any distinctions between the anger you have about the CMO's giving directions now compared to Shane Fitzsimmons during the fires?

Yep, clear distinctions.
Shane was issuing directions necessary for the immediate prevention of death, and only in the areas under threat.
The CMOs are destroying everybody's freedom for the sake of problematic theories, slashing the whole economy when its not necessary, and scaring all people with hyperbolic scaremongering.
The potential for death by Wuhan Flu in Australia is horrible at the personal level but very small from a statistical analysis.

 

[Aurelius]

Yep, clear distinctions.
Shane was issuing directions necessary for the immediate prevention of death, and only in the areas under threat.
The CMOs are destroying everybody's freedom for the sake of problematic theories, slashing the whole economy when its not necessary, and scaring all people with hyperbolic scaremongering.

Yep.

It was appropriate to defer to the CMOs when we were still learning to grapple with a genuine health crisis. Now that we've gotten past the worst of the health crisis, we're faced with an economic and employment crisis, so you'd hope the premiers would be consulting experts with a wider focus at this stage.

 

[boyo]

^^^
That ‘productive capacity of the economy’ line is straight from modern monetary theory which has been unanimously rejected by the mainstream economic community.

"Stephanie Kelton is an American economist and academic. She is currently a professor at Stony Brook University and was formerly a professor University of Missouri–Kansas City."
Take it up with her, and see how you go.

 

[boyo]

I thought that someone would use The Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe or Venezuala, and it didn't take long.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Arise, Sir Colonel Captain Tom.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12333343

 

[Derpus]

A realist, I don't live in a world where anyone has any idea what should be done about this.

They are all making it up as they go along

Governments f*ck up, which political party in charge is irrelevant.

My preference is that we limit their power so their f*ck ups are just less important

My preference is to trust the populations to do the right thing most of the time by providing them with the information they need to make good personal decisions, not jack booted thugs enforcing arbitrary rules that make no sense.

We already now know that people were already social distancing before the governments locked shit down

Not a society with the elites are deciding that staying locked up suits them as they are getting paid whilst the less well off go without, as the elites arbitrarily decide who is important and what businesses are important

Your belief in the rationality and intelligence of the average human is admirable. I think the US and UK have pretty effectively demonstrated that 'relying on people to make good decisions' would not have gone particularly well.

In my view, the pure libertarian model leads to a whole variety of undesirable factors. Without fairly strong governance the ability of society to respond to threats that require an effective holistic response is badly handicapped. The US, which has always claimed to be founded on libertarian ideals (though the reality of this is highly questionable), seems to be a fucking shitty place if you are poor.

I always wondered who these 'elites' are. Bit like the mythical 'Silent Australian'. Are they called the 'elites' by virtue of the fact that they are in a position of authority? or is it more of a Rothschild typed conspiracy theory about the power behind the authorities? Or is it just everyone better off than you? that would be very Australian.

 

[Braveheart81]

Yep, clear distinctions.
Shane was issuing directions necessary for the immediate prevention of death, and only in the areas under threat.
The CMOs are destroying everybody's freedom for the sake of problematic theories, slashing the whole economy when its not necessary, and scaring all people with hyperbolic scaremongering.
The potential for death by Wuhan Flu in Australia is horrible at the personal level but very small from a statistical analysis.

The economic outcomes are largely similar whether there are enforced lockdowns or not. Restaurants and other entertainment venues were already shutting their doors well before they were forced too because people had stopped going out.

Given Australia is tracking among the best countries in the world currently and our economy is forecast to have a faster rebound than most others, the decisions made would seem to be prudent.

 

[Up the Guts]

The economic outcomes are largely similar whether there are enforced lockdowns or not. Restaurants and other entertainment venues were already shutting their doors well before they were forced too because people had stopped going out.

Given Australia is tracking among the best countries in the world currently and our economy is forecast to have a faster rebound than most others, the decisions made would seem to be prudent.

All our success is conditional on a vaccine/treatment.

 

[Derpus]

All our success is conditional on a vaccine/treatment.

Aside from the hit to the tourism and international student industry (which is probably a good thing) - i don't see why. Exports and imports and going ahead full steam.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

The economic outcomes are largely similar whether there are enforced lockdowns or not. Restaurants and other entertainment venues were already shutting their doors well before they were forced too because people had stopped going out.

Based on analysis of 830K customers of a bank with Danish & Swedish operations,

"Economists at the University of Copenhagen have found lockdowns have had little impact on consumer spending habits and that the true dampener of purchasing activity is the coronavirus itself."

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2020/05/...ls-into-question-benefits-of-swedish-strategy

TLDR: 29% decline in Denmark when they went into lockdown, 25% in no-lockdown Sweden from around the same time.

 

[formerflanker]

Derpus, I agree the pure libertarian view would have poor outcomes, including the maintenance of open borders. Closing ours has been the number 1 preventative action taken in Australia.
As for identifying the "elites" I would firstly nominate any Public Servant with a salary greater than the Prime Minister.
Today I would add all public servants still in a job during the economic shutdown. Getting paid by the taxpayers yet no skin in the game.
Finally I'd include my current pet hate, the unelected bureaucrats who make decisions that cruel jobs/businesses/industries but have no public transparency surrounding their own appointment or capability.
Thanks for the thought-provoking question.

 

[Braveheart81]

All our success is conditional on a vaccine/treatment.

No it isn't. We are in a position where we will be able to largely re-open our economy and return to business as usual in a domestic setting and then hopefully in time add in NZ.

There is so little evidence currently how many people actually have antibodies in countries that have had huge uncontrolled outbreaks. Many of the antibody tests have been shown to be wildly inaccurate or outright ineffective. There is also the problem of how those countries bring their outbreak back down to a low enough level that the population is safe to resume normal activities. It is entirely unknown how long people with antibodies will have immunity. The fact that there has never been herd immunity achieved from a virus where a vaccine doesn't exist is entirely relevant.

Borders are going to remain largely closed in most places regardless of what rules are created. If the US says it is open again to tourists, do you really think they're going to turn up?

 

[fatprop]

The unintended consequences of working from home

What if we all stay working from home forever? Some might welcome a new dawn of workplace flexibility where employees, at least those in knowledge economy jobs, can work from any place, any time. Yet it doesn’t necessarily play out the way people think it will.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/wor...ugp.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter

I have one mate who has already outsourced his art department to India, 1/4 of the price and much quicker

 

[Derpus]

Derpus, I agree the pure libertarian view would have poor outcomes, including the maintenance of open borders. Closing ours has been the number 1 preventative action taken in Australia.
As for identifying the "elites" I would firstly nominate any Public Servant with a salary greater than the Prime Minister.
Today I would add all public servants still in a job during the economic shutdown. Getting paid by the taxpayers yet no skin in the game.
Finally I'd include my current pet hate, the unelected bureaucrats who make decisions that cruel jobs/businesses/industries but have no public transparency surrounding their own appointment or capability.
Thanks for the thought-provoking question.

GIPA? not sure why there wouldnt be any transparency about their capabilities.

All public servants are the elite? novel view.

 

[Braveheart81]

As for identifying the "elites" I would firstly nominate any Public Servant with a salary greater than the Prime Minister.
Today I would add all public servants still in a job during the economic shutdown. Getting paid by the taxpayers yet no skin in the game.
Finally I'd include my current pet hate, the unelected bureaucrats who make decisions that cruel jobs/businesses/industries but have no public transparency surrounding their own appointment or capability.
Thanks for the thought-provoking question.

The highest paid public servants are paid what they are because their jobs are complex and the right caliber of talent needs to be attracted. The Prime Minister's salary is largely arbitrary. The top public service jobs are effectively in competition with the private sector (which pays substantially more).

Why would you reduce public servants salaries? All it does is damage wage growth elsewhere. One of the reasons why wage growth has been well below the desired level in Australia is because politicians keep instituting public sector wage freezes which is deflationary and delays wage growth across the economy.

The unelected bureaucrats are just employees of government agencies. They are the responsibility of elected politicians and if they aren't fit for the job then it is the politician's responsibility to replace them.

 

[formerflanker]

All public servants are the elite? novel view.

Just getting with the novel Coronavirus times.

 

[Braveheart81]

I have one mate who has already outsourced his art department to India, 1/4 of the price and much quicker

Business have been offshoring to India and the Philippines in particular for years. Someone making that decision now really just means they were slow on the uptake. It's not some new phenomenon from working from home.

 

[formerflanker]

Wage growth should be driven by productivity, not taxpayer-funded PS salaries. The latter just leads to a giant Ponzi bubble ready to burst.
That may happen soon, with 72% of Australian workers being paid by the private sector. Federal, state and local government employees plus current JobKeeper and JobSeeker numbers rely on 28% of the workforce plus other taxes. It's too big to sustain.
Rising Public Sector salaries are counter productive.

 

[Derpus]

Wage growth should be driven by productivity, not taxpayer-funded PS salaries. The latter just leads to a giant Ponzi bubble ready to burst.
That may happen soon, with 72% of Australian workers being paid by the private sector. Federal, state and local government employees plus current JobKeeper and JobSeeker numbers rely on 28% of the workforce plus other taxes. It's too big to sustain.
Rising Public Sector salaries are counter productive.

It should, but it hasn't been. Productivity has been at record highs over the past several years - wages growth is stagnant.

Hard to say why - but reducing public servant salaries is not good for the economy. It just means less tax dollars are put back into the economy. I never understood how people were convinced that austerity was needed and that it was somehow good for the economy.

More people with less money means a smaller economy.

Plus government debt is not really the end of the world - as long as it's at serviceable levels.