I don't read newspapers, and the online site is paywalled, but another source reports that, in The Australian, someone called Steve Waterson wrote an article, which included the question, 'When did precious become priceless?" The question referring to what Waterson calls the PM's sense of Christian compassion (saving everyone at massive cost to the economy) leading him to get the balance wrong - most people won't be affected by the China virus, and most who are will suffer only mild symptoms. Prime Minister Morrison has been "manipulated by modellers" (as with climate modelling), according to this story.

This theory could be agreed to by some, poo-pooed by others. But the theme of the thread is "What if it's all for nothing", and this one more thought on the matter.

Hey ttbn,
I think most of the actions government has taken to stop the spread of C19 are justified.
We've done fairly well to prevent a much more serious situation.

I'm not sure all of the handouts given out are justified however.
I think a lot of it might prove to have been unnecessary.

I think if we can keep the daily total of infected under 100 and maybe bring it down a little more, we might be able to start letting some people go back to work, so long as they can ensure social distancing rules stay in place.

Whilst we should be cautious to not rush for normality too soon, I'd be happy to keep the current measures in place for at least another week, after that look at particular jobs and ways we can start to get things back to normal, where it's safe to do so.

Kogan are selling 3M Masks that work out at $14ea.
http://www.kogan.com/au/buy/3m-9502-n95-particulate-respirator-mask-25-pack-3m/

If an employer can provide masks and gloves ($5 for a box of 100 Ansell disposable gloves at Bunnings - if you can get them) and social distancing measures remain in place then I think this is enough basic protection if the number of daily infected continues to fall, that we can consider some people returning to work where it's relatively safe or low risk to do so.

Looking ahead it's time to start asking some serious questions.

If I apply all the crap I go on about re:
The way to the truth on any issue is to separate arguments that do hold merit from those that don't.

COVID-19: What, When, Where, Why, How

The when and where is a big job, really a matter of tracing many when and wheres to get to where it really all started.
That's one line of inquiry.

- But another line of inquiry is that the virus can speak for itself -

The most important first question to start this Covid-19 investigation should be this:

** Did COVID-19 come from a lab or was it an accident of nature? **
http://youtu.be/NdMt8bHfQKM

[Cont.]

The reason why knowing whether COVID-19 came from a lab or was an accident of nature is the most important question is this:

Firstly, it's the whole nature of the 'What'.
I can't get to 'Why' if I don't first know the 'What'.

I want to know whether:

A/ This came from nature and humans as a whole will be ok once we develop an immunity to it.
OR
B/ Whether or not this was concocted by people in a laboratory for the specific purposes of deliberately harming other people (in ways that may not even be fully known to us yet)

This stuff might be human-roundup and in six months time everyone drops dead, I don't know.

Let the virus speak for itself.
Did it come from a lab or an accident of nature?

If we find evidence it is NOT an accident of nature, then further questions should be devised and asked, in order to get to the truth of it.

Are we about to see the biggest manhunt in Australian history as the government starts to round up those 1.2 million temporary visa holders who lost their jobs a casuals and cannot sustain themselves because they are not entitled to welfare?

They have been given their marching orders by the government. But how many of them want to or cannot return to their homes in places like China, Sudan, Indonesia, India, etc., and are in hiding in cities and towns around the country?

STOP PRESS

Just saw Josh Frydenberg on The Insiders say there are 2.2 million temporary visa holders working as casuals in Australia.

They will need a lot of vans to round up this bunch!

An anonymous blogger refers to the people on ABC's 'Insiders' as a "pack of morons" who should socially isolate themselves and read something "other than the Communist Manifesto".

Why? Well they have called for the government to borrow more money to spend to alleviate the effects of the China virus.

Anon wonders from whom the money would be borrowed. It would, of course, be from 'others', and not from the likes of Marxist morons working for the ABC. So, who would lend money to a government chucking the stuff around in order to give the impression that they are 'doing a good job', and should be re-elected when the time comes? No real people at the current interest rates. So, who/where?

The Reserve Bank could print more money?
Banks forced to buy government bonds?
Raids on superannuation funds?

No matter where extra money could come from, what these ABC clowns are really calling for - in accordance with their greed for other people's money - is "state confiscation of wealth".

The chance of most Australians being laid low by the virus of a Communist Chinese government is very low; nothing compared with the financial ruin that our own neo-Communists would have us suffer