Damn I wish I had listened to my father and become a solicitor. You could make a fortune out of eejits like this.

Geektastic:

 

Damn I wish I had listened to my father and become a solicitor. You could make a fortune out of eejits like this.

 

I expect that, given one of these eejits is on home D, that you and I are paying a fortune to solicitors for this.

frankv:

Geektastic:

Damn I wish I had listened to my father and become a solicitor. You could make a fortune out of eejits like this.

I expect that, given one of these eejits is on home D, that you and I are paying a fortune to solicitors for this.

 

The nature of their litigation might be a bit frivolous but the general principle, that nation states have overreacted to the virus and the extreme restrictions on peoples liberties (including going about their lawful business) has been questioned by some leading intellectuals including former Supreme Court Justice Lord Sumption. The link is but one of the non-paywall articles discussing this.

I tend to agree, that a state should only take such actions in the most extreme of circumstances and I don’t believe this warrants it. I also think that these actions have been decided by too small a group of individuals. There is the risk ulterior motives, even if they are not directly in their thoughts at the time, can come out through from their underlying political believes. I see President Macron is now touting that this could be the end of capitalism...if that’s not political.

That’s not to say sensible actions and advisories should not be taken by authorities.

Lastman:

 

The nature of their litigation might be a bit frivolous but the general principle, that nation states have overreacted to the virus and the extreme restrictions on peoples liberties (including going about their lawful business) has been questioned by some leading intellectuals including former Supreme Court Justice Lord Sumption. The link is but one of the non-paywall articles discussing this.

 

I tend to agree, that a state should only take such actions in the most extreme of circumstances and I don’t believe this warrants it. I also think that these actions have been decided by too small a group of individuals. There is the risk ulterior motives, even if they are not directly in their thoughts at the time, can come out through from their underlying political believes. I see President Macron is now touting that this could be the end of capitalism...if that’s not political.

 

That’s not to say sensible actions and advisories should not be taken by authorities.

 

I personally think they've done a great job -- we aren't going to know the alternative set of events because they didn't happen, but if you compare it to other countries that didn't lock down _as_ quick, you can see their infection and death rates have gone exponential. My only gripe was that they were letting people come back in to NZ for a time without forcing them to quarantine. I don't think every individual can be trusted (and clearly they can't because it kept spreading with cases tracing back to people who had travelled) to self isolate for 14 days.

Other countries shut their borders much earlier, such as Mongolia, and have had very very few cases because of it (if you can believe their numbers, I guess that's another story)

I wasn't too pleased at the initial announcement of a lockdown, just as I'm sure a lot of people weren't, but that was because we were supposedly quite late in getting some numbers of people being infected and transmitting the virus through their communities. Looking back I'm glad it wasn't left any later. As for Trump, he's the one to watch with ulterior motives - trying to push an untested drug (in which he and some buddies have a stake in) onto the people of America, only to later find out it would have caused serious complications for diabetics. 

Are you meaning because of all this you think Labour are going to get more votes at the election? I don't know if that's true or not. I'm not particularly left or right wing, I agree with some things and disagree with other things, and this wouldn't affect my vote.

I will say though, that Jacinda Ardern has had a lot of crap to deal with and I don't know if I could have done it any better.

Lastman:

 

The nature of their litigation might be a bit frivolous but the general principle, that nation states have overreacted to the virus and the extreme restrictions on peoples liberties (including going about their lawful business) has been questioned by some leading intellectuals including former Supreme Court Justice Lord Sumption. The link is but one of the non-paywall articles discussing this.

 

Perhaps we don't have a high number of infections and deaths because of this thing you are calling overreaction - and because of this lack of deaths you think it was an overreaction.

I think it was well done, the people joined in - unlike some countries where a crazy President is leading a band of people who are fighting to keep things open (USA and Brazil). Just look at how badly they are doing.

The slippery slope argument doesn't cut.

What perplexes me is, why single out the PM? She is the Prime Minister, not the President, so as such is ‘the chairman of the board’. That board being Cabinet. While I assume there are varying strengths of personality round the (virtual at the moment) Cabinet table, it is not a dictatorship.

Apart from all the other ridiculous reasons why this suit is hopeless, surely the collective responsibility of Cabinet means no one individual could be sued anyway? (IANAL)

Shouldn't they lock him up for a month? 

freitasm:

 

Perhaps we don't have a high number of infections and deaths because of this thing you are calling overreaction - and because of this lack of deaths you think it was an overreaction.

 

Or to put it into context that a lot of us on this forum will recognise:

Y2K was an overreaction. I woke up on January 1st, 2000 and all the computers were working fine. All those IT people shouting doom were just scamming me.

Just wait until people find out about the 2038 problem!

rogercruse:

 

Shouldn't they lock him up for a month? 

 

One guy (not related to this case) will be. Took five warnings before they acted though.

Dial111:

 

Before I gave up Facebook "stupid" was everywhere, I'm not surprised at all.

 

+1. Whenever someone has told me something stupid or just plainly wrong re Covid and I've asked where they heard it... 

Facebook.

Every time. 

     >I tend to agree, that a state should only take such actions in the most extreme of circumstances and I don’t believe this warrants it.<

I wonder if you are one of those people we often see at airport counters complaining of a delayed flight "just because there is a technical problem"?

If anyone wants to fly the plane in faulty condition, be my guest … likewise I guess one has the freedom to contract a deadly virus? 🙃

freitasm:

 

Perhaps we don't have a high number of infections and deaths because of this thing you are calling overreaction - and because of this lack of deaths you think it was an overreaction.

 

The paradox of lockdown. The more successful it is, the more it reinforces the skeptics view that it was an over reaction. 

dafman:

 

The paradox of lockdown. The more successful it is, the more it reinforces the skeptics view that it was an over reaction. 

 

*plays the freedom isn't free song from team america*