Foul-Mouth,

You especially would know what they say in Beijing: "If we've developed a virus like that then we might as well let them have!"

Misop,

So you DO know what they're saying in Peking ? You ARE a Chinese agent ?

Joe

Joe,

My point is that lockdowns appear to work especially when they are initiated with speed and decision.

The fact that the population of the US is more than 13 more than ours (331 million to 25 million) might have something to do with the difference in death figures.

Compare Australia with Taiwan - same population, no lockdowns, spitting distance from China - 7 deaths.

The question really is: why is Australia's death rate 114 times higher than Taiwan's?

Hi IsMise,

Yes, indeed: early and hard lockdowns, say for a month, with rigorous contact-tracing, use of masks, social distance and no unnecessary travel, seem to have been what worked. Clearly, the opposite in the US HASN'T worked all that well.

I suppose we can juxtapose, say, Sweden's experience with those of the other Scandinavian countries - vastly better results from them rather than from Sweden.

Or our experience compared with that of the US: 800-odd rather compared with nearly 400,000 - no deaths for months now here, compared with 4000 each day under Trumpf's watch.

Maybe the ultimate lesson will be (it hasn't been really applied yet in many countries) that they have to lock down hard, sooner or later, and the sooner the better. So the UK farts around, France too, many other countries, anything to dodge the need to lock down. And deaths there increase rapidly.

Viruses will arise periodically. So lockdowns will be needed promptly, no BS excuses. Sure, bail out businesses. But clamp down early and hard, and the light at the end of the tunnel will come that much sooner.

Joe

Dear Aiden,

You are correct. Bloomberg has direct government aid accounted for nearly 40% of farm income this year. I conflated the two.

Dear Canem Malum,

But most socialist countries have free markets in the tool box which they use in the right context just as the US is doing.

You wrote; "Why does Australia need to grow farm produce for the US market when it doesn't want it- they have a right to their own sovereignty. We can produce things for those that want it or preserve it as long term food supplies."

But the US is the world's largest agricultural exporter doubling amount the next closest. Australia doesn't even get in the top 10. We are battling a country which subsidises nearly 40% of its farmers income. These are socialist handouts and make it very hard for Australian farmers to compete in world markets.