Quinkla

I keep being pinged with notifications for this so it has persuaded me briefly out of PIO dormancy. The original article is behind a paywall so I cant read it, but it refers to scientists, suggesting that this is not a proposed change to our common language but rather a need to refer to people in a quite specific mediical situation - e.g. trans men who retain some parts of the female reproductive system which need attention. Referring to such people in scientific articles as men or women would be unhelpful, so there is a need for more situation-specific terms. As I say, I can't read the article so this is just my supposition. But it would not be the first time the far right have quoted something out of context to stir up prejudice and hate. It's what they do best.

You might be surprised if you actually look up the language requirements.

Many visas require little or no English. The Ielts 4.5 level for functional English is a very low level, and many visa holders are not even required to get to that level.

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_reg/br2018200/s84.html

In fairness, though, fences in Australia are much higher and people are made to block out their windows to avoid seeing their neighbours.

You are boring. You bore me. I am bored. That's how transitive verbs work.

I mean that the friendships seem superficial - they seem to rely too much on never rocking the boat, never being needy or unhappy, never saying how you actually feel. Differences of opinion seem to be taken as personal affronts.

Fair enough. I have discussed this with a number of expats from a variety of home countries and they say this is also their experience.

Australia is not a particularly friendly country and even looking at other people's friend circles, they are quite superficial. IMO Australians are way too uptight and probably the most thin-skinned people on Earth. Even supposedly close friends seem to be constantly looking for ways to be upset and offended.

Fair enough - that's their funeral. I guess the borders will have to remain closed then.

I'm sure Victoria would be willing to share its experiences but ultimately it is not our responsibility to get your tracing capability up to scratch.

No they don't. https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/are-covid-death-rates-really-falling-globally Please stop making stuff up. It doesn't help.

How and ever, the Constitution sets states up as sovereign and the Commonwealth only gets a look in on issues that the states and territories have agreed to cede to the Commonwealth. Actually, a national approach would be very unhelpful right now. Even within states, we are seeing local differences in regulation according to need. A one size fits all approach either leads to restrictions being placed on areas that don't need it, or on an inability to tackle hotspots until the problem has got big enough to justify a national intervention.

Of course not. Just noting that the same people who said we should open up for Mothers' Day are the same people who said our lockdown was not strict enough and we should have brought in the police/army, who are the same people who voted against a state of emergency, who are the same people as now say we should live with Covid and accept the mortality. I am not seeing scrutiny or strategy, just contrariness. As for who they are - they are the same people who signed a contract for the East West link a couple of weeks before an election they knew they would lose, committing Victorians to paying hundreds of millions for cancelling the contract just so they could criticise the new Government. Blowing millions of dollars of hard earned money and spreading a deadly virus to score political points - and still people vote for them. Go figure.

If I were a cynic, I'd be suggesting that some people who don't have Daniel Andrews's best interests at heart are trying to sabotage his strategy in order to have political ammunition to lob at him - paying for that ammo with lives.

It's interesting that none of the lead signatories on the Covid Medical Network article you cite are virologists. There seem to be a lot of anaesthetists, some GPs, a urologist... And the network of more than 500 Victorian doctors is actually a group of doctors, nurses and other health professionals who may or may not come from Victoria.

No - it's a stupid question. This is a complex issue and it deserves serious consideration, not sloganeering or tricking people into making damaging statements.

I'm not sure how that is flipping an argument around or how that is relevant. We know that the mortality from Covid is 2-4% and we know that if it is left unchecked, almost all of us will get it. So with Australia having a population of 20 million, that would be 400,000-800,000 deaths. I don't think many people would think that was OK if it could be avoided.

But that is very selective. The bit about 200 deaths from Covid per week, for example, as a justification for removing restrictions. Sure, there was a time under lockdown when the death rate did get that low. It has since increased. Yesterday, for example, there were 138 deaths due to Covid. The day before there were 137. The day before there were 143. And since the start of Covid, there have been 43,293 deaths, which is about 1500 deaths per week, give or take. It exceeded 1100 deaths a day before lockdown. So by all means look at low death and transmission rates under lockdown, but be aware that the low numbers are because of lockdown, not because the virus has gone away.

That may well have to happen, but that would be a decision for society as a whole, not for a couple of politicians or medics. The mortality rate in Victoria has been 4%. I just don't think we, as a society, are ready for that. The countries where they have lesser restrictions (e.g. UK, USA) still have some restrictions and they don't seem to be very happy with the way things are going. This is a bad situation, and blaming the people leading the response won't make the problem go away.

Sadly that is not the case. Our super spreaders from Chadstone have managed to spread it as far as Shepparton. And this is what happens when we do have the restrictions. Imagine what it would be like without.

The problem is that people seem to be contagious for a couple of days before they show symptoms - so there is the issue of their contacts for the past couple of days, and the contacts for those people, and so on. We are seeing in Victoria right now how easily and how far the virus can spread - one person in a shopping centre and a few days later we have infections 80km away in regional Victoria. And that is with Level 4 restrictions. If I were the NSW Premier I would be watching Victoria with a degree of concern that any one of the infections in NSW could go the same way.

I did not mean to be insensitive towards the many people who are doing it hard. I do think, though, that unless you live in Melbourne or Mitchell Shire it would be difficult to imagine just what our life is like right now. It is not all bad - there are upsides of spending more time at home, walking our local streets, visiting parks, etc. - but it is deeply weird and the uncertainty about how long it will last is very unsettling. Many of us are dreading a return to CBD working.

But it sounds like normal within WA. That sounds pretty attractive right now if you're sitting where I am and I cannot even travel into the next suburb to go to the shops, or sit in the same room as my family. Victoria couldn't squish the virus last time and I have to say things don't look great right now either. A single family connected with the Butchers in Chadstone Shopping Centre decided to ignore the restrictions, met up as a group from across Melbourne, and now they are passing the virus into their own communities. Twenty four active cases so far across multiple suburbs and rising. One active case and a super spreading event has the capability to take us all down - and that's nothing to do with Daniel Andrews.

I thought it was common knowledge.