Silvaire wrote:
I think that percentage will rise once government stops presenting the illusion that its somehow protecting people who don’t protect themselves.
Don’t know which government you are talking about – but would be stupid to do so as it is obviously wrong.
Reasonable governments always told that one can only protect oneself (by social distancing) and the measures imposed are only to “create an incentive” for those who are to dumb to protect themselves to actually do it.
It is interesting that some of the biggest global supporters of the “it’s not government business to protect the people” come out of a country which has the second largest military (government) spending per capita. The corresponding opinion on military would be “it’s not government business to protect its people – everybody who thinks he needs protection can buy a gun”.
At least from this side of the pond it, however, looks like that most people do not get this contradiction but the biggest supporters of the military are also the biggest critics of government actions in the war against Covid.
Graham wrote:
I worry about the extent to which our politics is driven not by public opinion, but by campaigners, trade unions, journalists and special-interest groups.
There’s two fundamental problems with this infamous “public opinion”:
First of all if you even look at very prominent and therefore well researched questions (like Brexit, general elections, etc.) you unfortunately realize that opinion research is not really good at identifying this “public opinion” – not to mention that public that is in times of Facebook, etc. particularly bad at identifying public opinion and very often mixes up the majority voice with the loudest voice.
Second, public opinion is typically not really good in taking care or the needs of majorities. If you would ask for the public opinion about “do we need people that fly around and burn lots of fuel just for fun” the answer might probably be no.
But I can really comfort you: In Germany there are weekly polls on the public opinion about the measures taken by the government. With exception on very few weeks in the last year, there has always been a clear majority for “just about right”.
Malibuflyer wrote:
There’s two fundamental problems with this infamous “public opinion”:
First of all if you even look at very prominent and therefore well researched questions (like Brexit, general elections, etc.) you unfortunately realize that opinion research is not really good at identifying this “public opinion” – not to mention that public that is in times of Facebook, etc. particularly bad at identifying public opinion and very often mixes up the majority voice with the loudest voice.
Second, public opinion is typically not really good in taking care or the needs of majorities. If you would ask for the public opinion about “do we need people that fly around and burn lots of fuel just for fun” the answer might probably be no.
Add to that: public opinion is massively influenced by mass media and by the way things are portrayed there with the goal to make money. Therefore public opinion very often is based on exagarated “facts” and quite often simply misled.
In the covid context: Public opinion in Switzerland regarding vaccination strategy and all that was massively negative until about 2 months ago, when people started to realize that it actually works. Yes, it was a tad later than other countries but it was, in retrospect, well planned and implemented. However, public opinion 2 months ago, fuelled by media frenzy, was that the government had acted totally lazily and irresponsibly and why aren’t we where Israel is e.t.c.
It is also quite true that the loudest voices often are mistaken for the mayority. Add to that, a lot of people will lie straight out when asked in a poll what they will do, some out of “shame” of supporting something or someone who is not “PC”, sometimes out of spite and sometimes because they have not made up their mind but want to still say something. Sometimes this leads to quite startling results in elections or referendi.
Its surprising or perhaps not how many journalists and prominent media people end up leading their countries or ar least make up a prominent part of some countries’ governments.
If you take the case of e.g. Johnson, I don’t think he is a ‘journalist’ in the true sense of the word.
If someone has their eyes on a major position of political leadership then dabbling in journalism is a common part of the route they take, simply because getting people to pay for your opinions is great publicity.
Interesting question actually – what distinguishes a journalist from someone who just dabbles, writes a column alongside various other things, etc. As a case in point I have had one article published in national print media, and was paid for it, but I would not for a moment describe myself as a journalist.
gallois wrote:
Its surprising or perhaps not how many journalists and prominent media people end up leading their countries or ar least make up a prominent part of some countries’ governments.
In recent times, we’ve had two very prominent journalists run for election. (Probably more but two very prominent journalists come to mind).
The first was very upset that after he got elected, he was expected to serve his time in the background and not given a ministerial job and a real say in decisions. He left shortly afterwards.
The second ran as an independent, and found themselves in the lucky position where the government couldn’t make a majority and needed the support of independents. They got themselves a cabinet position (ministerial job). He was terrible at it, messed up everything he tried and in the end tried very hard to avoid making any decision. He wasn’t elected second time around.
I think it’s easier to criticise than to do!
dublinpilot wrote:
I think it’s easier to criticise than to do!
Not to forget that a lot of those people live of vile criticism and incensory comments, the moment they are asked to deliver, they fail miserably. There are people who thrive on being attacked and can only get their followership if the attacks continue.
People also have a fatal tendency to bend the truth to their liking. I think why there is a good chance the vaccination campaigns will not yield the result of herd immunity in many countries is that readiness for vaccination is rapidly decreasing with those not yet vaccined. Here in Switzerland, many people either can’t be bothered or are part of the tinfoil hat brigades. Yesterday I encountered one of those who claimed I and another person present were a danger to the public because we have bowed to the powers of the new world government by accepting a vaccine, which clearly is only there to enslave mankind. Well, if this was one nutcase… but there are many. Press is reporting now that people do no longer sign up for vaccinations and lots of them simply don’t turn up even after registering. This is very scary. A 70% vaccination rate is needed, otherwise the moment the measures are stopped, the non vaccined people will cause a 4th wave a sure as hell.
Basically, there is only the one way that people who are not vaccined are basically shunned and excluded from everything. Who does not carry a green pass should be kept on the lockdown regime as THEY are a danger to the public. Now that there is plenty of vaccine around, there is NO excuse for people not to take their share of responsibility.
Mind, I guess if the measures need to be prolonged and also vaccined people need to continue wearing masks, doing PCR tests and all that BECAUSE the anti vaxxers have basically sided with the virus on this war, it will not be long before social or even physical pressure against such people will reach a boiling point. We will see how many will than still stand fast. But they are a danger and something needs to be done about them.
gallois wrote:
Its surprising or perhaps not how many journalists and prominent media people end up leading their countries or ar least make up a prominent part of some countries’ governments.
If you want to give it a positive spin: Journalists are (ok: should be…) professionally trained to listen to people and condense the essence of the information and opinion they hear from many different directions into a concise story. From that point of view it is at least (ok: should be…) strongly overlapping with what a politician should do.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
A 70% vaccination rate is needed, otherwise the moment the measures are stopped, the non vaccine people will cause a 4th wave a sure as hell
A contrary view might be “so what”? Once everyone has been offered a vaccine, I little reason for further restrictions. Those who want to be protected are, and those who aren’t protected aren’t. If large numbers of those choosing not to be vaccinated get infected then that is a risk they choose to take for themselves. If 10% of them get infected and seriously ill, then you might find a lot of others changing their mind and get vaccinated, reducing the problem.
There will unfortunately be a very small number who can’t be vaccinated due to some health issue, and there will be those who are vaccinated but still catch it, but there is a limit to how much and how long we can close society. My view is that that limit runs out when everyone has been offered a vaccine.
The difficulty might be in the hospitals, but if there is a policy of “if no space capacity, then those with covid who refused the vaccine are at the back of the queue for a hospital bed” it might solve that.
I’m laughing at the idea of educated journalists in 2021. I think anybody with reasonable intelligence and education has stopped listening to most of the nonsense they produce. The underlying issue is that the press is dying as a business and cannot afford to pay quality people. What’s left are in many or most cases low paid kids who get paid to either sell the agenda of their very wealthy employer (who is looking for regulation to lock out his up and coming competition) or to create enough buzz to maintain a weak advertising stream and pay their own low salaries.
Obviously, once everybody can be vaccinated and prevented from becoming seriously ill if they choose, the government role is over, and it appears based on real world experience in places where those that want to, have done so, that the pandemic is then over too. What happens going forward to those who choose not to be vaccinated (e.g. my wife) is their own problem, and that’s fine if they choose it. If for some reason new strains do become an issue for those who chose to be vaccinated (I doubt it) then the pharmaceutical industry will need to get busy, and I have every confidence that they would be successful.
My US motorcycling friends are planning a month long Europe trip in September, from Germany to Barcelona, then along the Pyrenees, Bay of Biscay and back more directly. Hope they can do it. I’m planning for Corsica and Italy in spring of 2022, anticipating that the Schengen zone border crossing politics will be over by then.
I agree, the vast majority of journos/reporters are dumb, but most media is pitched at dumb people (look at the utterly dreary thicko patronising BBC website) and over here in N Europe, one life lost is one life too many…
One can only hope that reality will take over once the bill reaches a trillion or so, so much that even the central bank can’t afford the WD40 for the printing press 
