Mooney_Driver wrote:
I honestly hope Australia and NZ keep their doors firmly shut and do not cave in to pressure to open up. It would be treason to the people who have endured hardships to win the war against Covid.
Odd rhetoric and I think you may be missing the point somewhat.
The question is how do they eventually ‘escape’ from their self-imposed isolation. They cannot close their borders forever, because their economies depend on tourism to some extent and international business travel to a greater extent. But if they expect to wait until there is zero risk of importing Covid, they will be waiting forever.
As of now, Australia has 2,308 active infections, of whom 18 are seriously ill. To deal with this they are in complete lockdown, and have been for several weeks now. This morning I spoke to my team member who lives in Sydney, and he says they envisage it remaining in place until everyone has been offered a vaccination – which is likely to be several months. Even if they are able to fully vaccinate their population, any subsequent opening up will mean they have to deal with infection numbers far in excess of these.
I would like to see Aus and NZ one day, having never been, but I’m in no hurry and if I can never go then I won’t lose any sleep.
Their big mistake was believing they can keep it out so they are way behind on vaccination.
Italy confiscated one shipment destined for Australia (action later backed up by Brussels) but I don’t think the quantity was significant, although they probably thought “why have this hassle when we don’t really need it”.
It is a very long flight to get down there 
But in NZ & Australia, their economies has been largely open with few restrictions other than international travel.
Mean while the rest of the world struggles from lockdown to restriction with big disruptions to industry and particuarly the hospitality industry.
The exist strategy must be to get everyone vaccinated then reopen.
dublinpilot wrote:
But in NZ & Australia, their economies has been largely open with few restrictions other than international travel.
Not at the moment, they’re completely locked down and are likely to remain so for the next few months. All hospitality is closed other than take-aways.
Their agricultural sector depends on seasonal migrant labour from abroad. Zero tourism will be costing them an awful lot, particularly New Zealand. As time goes on, the implications for international business will increase. International firms like the one I work for, with an office of maybe 400 people in Sydney and a smaller one in Melbourne are writing the place off as somewhere to do business. No-one can go there, you can’t get anything done in healthcare-related areas “due Covid”, and we will probably never hire another person there. It’ll be left to atrophy and in a few years the last person to leave the office will turn out the lights. And we have an Australian national as CEO!
dublinpilot wrote:
The exist strategy must be to get everyone vaccinated then reopen.
That seems the only logical way out for them. But when they do that, they will still need to accept infection rates far, far higher than they have seemed prepared to accept to date.
The assertion someone made that they have painted themselves into a corner is bang on the money.
Airborne_Again wrote:
How did these countries plan to end the containment regimes from the beginning? It was already obvious that the disease was not going to go away. Or didn’t they plan that far ahead?
I don’t see the problem. The only goal here is to save as many as possible. I mean, it’s the only reason for any government to intervene at all. Obviously you cannot save more people than what is possible. Get the old and sick vaccinated, and you have already saved 99% of those that potentially would die (or make it 91 or whatever the current vaccine is capable of). Getting more people vaccinated is only a bonus. This will:
The largest benefit is the two first. This pretty much guaranties that those who get infected have the largest possible chance of surviving. Lots of resources can be allocated to each individual.
This is essentially what Norway, Finland and Iceland has done as well, and with only a fraction of the deaths compared with the rest of Europe. In Norway we could all be fully vaccinated by now, if we didn’t trash the AZ and J&J vaccines. The thing is, it don’t matter when looking at the number of deaths. The ones who die now are the fully vaccinated old and sick that simply are too weak no matter what. Vaccines are the way out of this, but it’s not like the vaccines change reality. A vaccine is not magic.
As far as isolating the country goes. The map below is the current (as of today) version of travelling restrictions when entering Norway. This is valid for everybody who cannot show a “corona passport”. Roughly speaking green is free to enter, other colors are quarantine in lesser or larger extent. If you can show a “corona passport” (fully vaccinated or has had covid), then you are free to enter from anywhere. If you are a Norwegian it’s enough to have only one shot, I think at least.
IMO Aus, NZ and similar will get out of this with the lowest possible number of deaths, and things will get back to normal as nothing has happened. There is something about keeping a cool head, do the right things, the things that work, and keep clear of hype, quasi-science and superstitions.
LeSving wrote:
IMO Aus, NZ and similar will get out of this with the lowest possible number of deaths
The lowest number of deaths is not the sole objective, though many in politics and the media act as though it is.
If you use lockdowns as a blunt tool to minimise deaths, that comes at enormous cost. Direct economic cost (despite the rubbish put out there that it’s Covid that costs money rather than spending billions on handouts, testing, tracing etc) as well as all the social costs and effects on people’s lives.
Somewhere there is a balance to be achieved. Many governments around the world have lost sight of that and are attempting to eliminate the virus and minimise Covid deaths on a money-no-object basis.
It’ll be left to atrophy and in a few years the last person to leave the office will turn out the lights.
Yes; I had a chat with a “big businessman” the other day about this. His view (which I agree with) is that those companies which just collected the support grants etc and told their customers to “f-k off due to covid” (which is what many many did, and not just govt / civil service / CAA type “organisations” which did this more or less automatically – look at the UK CAA which seems to have made no effort at all – but many “real” businesses too) will lose a lot of business and many will go bust; deservedly so. There was even an outrageous move by the GP business to block all personal appointments and go totally phone-only (at least for the initial one) but thankfully it was blocked.
This is the same argument as whether one should continue advertising during a recession. Many companies stop and save the money. They are the ones which are gone when the recession ends…
This is essentially what Norway, Finland and Iceland has done as well, and with only a fraction of the deaths compared with the rest of Europe.
These countries are exceptional though. As often stated, Norway has a very wealthy, socially coherent and sparsely distributed population. Very little tourism. Finland has even less tourism. Iceland is an island…
The UK, in comparison, is a place which a lot of people pass through and where many people want to go, for various reasons (the language, probably the most friendly reception of foreigners in Europe, especially of coloured people, basically functioning government, lots of social benefits…). Like some other European countries it has a colonial past which drives a high level of foreign travel, which is how it got the India variant in such a big way and so early on.
Peter wrote:
The UK, in comparison, is a place which a lot of people pass through and where many people want to go, for various reasons (the language, probably the most friendly reception of foreigners in Europe, especially of coloured people, basically functioning government, lots of social benefits…). Like some other European countries it has a colonial past which drives a high level of foreign travel, which is how it got the India variant in such a big way and so early on.
This is not correct. It has to be seen in relation to the population size. You could say that tourists in Norway are mostly wealthy and/or healthy (usually both), while people flocking to the Mediterranean usually are neither. Besides, Norway like Sweden has the highest influx of people from anywhere in comparison to the population size. A couple of generations ago the UK had a high influx, but today? not so much.
You could say that tourists in Norway are mostly wealthy and/or healthy (usually both), while people flocking to the Mediterranean usually are neither
A lot of truth in that
UK gets a lot of tourism. It has not reduced; any google/images search digs out graphs like this
It has to be seen in relation to the population size
Yes, which is where Norway has a big advantage. Lots of money distributed among fewer people → a wealthy population. And susceptibility to CV19 scales strongly (inversely) with income, and all the things which correlate with income.
So different countries need different solutions.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Vaccination is a protection against severe illness and death, nothing more. It does not sufficiently hamper spread. So actually, vaccinated people in terms of spread have an advantage over unvaccinated as they are some 50% protected against infection, but for the purpose of epidemic control this is not enough by far to be let loose in a covid free society.
to me this is like saying we should all stop driving cars. Seatbelts, safety improvements, improved roads, improved cars, speed limits, alcohol testing all protect against dying (to an extend) but they don’t stop accidents completely. Let’s ban driving. Odd logic, really odd…
