Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky Luke 1
Similar story to Tassie. We had such a strong economy whilst we kept Covid out, plus a normal life with no masks. We opened up and our economy has suffered and the tourism we opened for is doing worse than when we had better border rules.
|
Yair.
The "opening up" policy seems to have been:
[1] all for the benefit of socio-economic elites who can afford a high degree of infection control for themselves and who could not care less about the rest of us; and
[2] a reaction by politicians to opinion polls and focus groups from "ordinary voters" who were bored, antsy, and lacked any self-control or self-discipline. Note that "ordinary voters" are ones who could never learn how to make a bowline, let alone splice double braid, maintain a
diesel auxiliary, or remember the difference between port and starboard hand or the detail of the Rules of the Road.
You'll have read the comments from the usual white 'pfella who blames everything on
China and Chinese.
The bottom line for
China,
Hong Kong,
Taiwan,
Japan, several of the micro-states in the
Pacific Ocean, and other economies that have chosen to limit international connections to control infection is clear.
"Opening up" leads to
[1] costs of infection control on everyone,
[2] protracted ill-health to some,
[3] premature death to many, and
[4] the illusion of profits from international tourism (which likely is just that - an illusion that does not deliver a benefit to the society except perhaps to a select few of that socio-economic elite caste).
In PRChina, the latest iteration of their calculations suggests that "opening up" China to "live with" the virus would deliver 2 million deaths in the first 12 months. See:
https://www.newscientist.com/article...ng-zero-covid/
Just because certain economies, including ones with massive inequality in poverty, have chosen to let a million or so of their poorer members die from Covid-19 does not mean it's the right policy for you (unless you belong to a rich, well-entitled caste and class, brim full of "U Fek Off" arrogance).
In a economy where voting is effectively compulsory, political leaders 'should' be quaking in their shoes. Every one of those deaths means the loss of one vote plus the votes of
family members who are smart enough to
work out who benefits/loses for themselves.
On the other hand, an economy where only the rich are voters and legislators, a different calculus holds. If that also coincides with an economy biased towards retailing to younger people with disposable
income and people conditioned to impulse
buying and addicted to TV
shopping etc, you can guess for yourself what happens.
In East Asian societies where parents and grandparents are respected and valued, yet another calculus holds.
On the other hand, cruisers familiar with everything from the wonders of the micro-states of the Pacific to the multicultural delights of maritime SE
Asia know to respect others, be patient, and can always find
maintenance and projects aboard (not to mention reinvestigating local cruising destinations).
WHO has been saying similar all along. Once again I presume you have not watched the segment.
Linear Mode
Recent Discussions