Dear Joe,

Just a small correction: SA still has two cases isolating in their homes, not in hospital: the two in hospital no longer have the virus, but are still recuperating from their difficult experience in ICU ventilation.

As for credits, it rather belongs to the people of SA who did not wait for politicians to tell them what to do, but acted with sense much earlier.

As to the disruption to everyday health services, that mistake was made by government, not by the people - it will cost more in health and lives in the months to come than the virus itself.

Yuyutsu,

Thanks for that - so SA has no cases in hospital, and certainly no patients on ventilators or respirators, and only two isolated at home, while the US has 1.2 million cases.

SA has implemented lock-downs, while the US, to the extent one can say they have any coherent policy at all, is pursuing a laissez-faire, do what you want, 'herd immunity' approach.

I wonder if SA should have followed the US model. Gosh, shouldn't we have had tens of thousands of cases by now ? Instead of two ?

Joe

Hi Joe,

A couple of the forums 'Usual Suspect' seem genuinely disappointed that Australia doesn't have 10,000 plus deaths from Covid-19. After all if you're going to spend $200 billion you want some results.

Is Donald Trump a liar, claiming to have evidence that China created the virus in a Wuhan lab. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE.

Dear Joe,

One could wonder whether it was luck or providence, but the people of SA found the golden moderate, optimal middleground.

Both countries and states that were more lenient and countries and states that were more strict are suffering more AND have more casualties.

The fact is that there is a limit to what restrictions people are able and willing to take: cross that line and all will be broken. Also, people are willing to sacrifice more when they do so conscientiously, of their own volition and understanding the objective situation. When instead you impose restrictions on people by force, you will receive no cooperation and will need to increasingly use your whip until your whip too will wear out and have no power.

South Australia never imposed a legal lock-down (staying at home remained only a "strong recommendation" and meetings of up to 10 people were not prohibited), but ordinary families effectively went into a stronger lock-down than their counterparts in other states, not because they had to but because they genuinely care for their elderly members and friends.

A good question asked today by a commentator:

"Why did Australia get such an ERSATZ conservative as prime minister in 2018 after the disastrous premiership and ignominious exit of Malcolm Turnbull? He who heads a “cabal of chancers and second raters”, as one political pundit has termed the Morrison Government".

Part of the answer lies with the fact that half the Liberal party room is still made up of Turnbull clones - the "chancers and second raters". Morrison has clearly shown that Australian politicians are 'all socialists now'. It's much easier to buy votes than it is to stand for something and work for something.

Is anybody taking note that the world's experts are saying that there will be a second wave of the pandemic due to the proposed easing of the restrictions and that the reality is that no one will be safe from infection until a vaccine has been developed.

Ask Soot 'Beam up me Scotty' Morrison if he can guarantee your safety against infection if you follow his directions. If he cannot then I suggest staying inside your bubble (if you're lucky enough to have one.)

When people follow what Soot is telling them I reckon there will be two groups: (1) those who work in a protected environment and/or can work at home, and (2) those who are compelled to venture into unsafe workplaces, public transport, etc., because they are desperate to earn money.

So ask Soot to guarantee your safety. I bet he won't!