SA Footy

Corona Man wrote:Not much in the way of comment from old Bum Crack in here lately...... I hope he has not succumbed to Covid-19.

Here ya go

football tragic wrote:The whole reason behind Scomo pushing hard for schools to open is kids are the lowest risk to get the virus.
It is all part of getting back some normality to low risk groups
He will then assess after a few weeks the result of that before lifing the next restricitons whilst keeping an eye on the curve to manage the levels.
End of may will look a lot different with what you can and cant do.
anyone who thinks we will keep the gate locked as it is now with such low infection rate needs to dig their head out the sand.

Totally agree
We actually need more infections otherwise we will just be chasing our tail. We have been way too good at isolating.
Unless China sends over their vaccine for it.

Booney wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Not much in the way of comment from old Bum Crack in here lately...... I hope he has not succumbed to Covid-19.

More of a chance he's succumbed to Chateaux Collapso.

Funny you mention that. Been home crook the last two days. Not feeling very well at all.

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:

whufc wrote:I mentioned yesterday but now that the government know they can legitimately enforce such regulations it would be a fool to suggest these measurements will only be used for 'pandemics' in the future.

Yeah, nah, not everything you read on Facebook is real.

Its got nothing to do with facebook.

After Covid-19, these measurements are a legitimate action and successful way to ease the burden on the medical system. The fact is that it isnt just pandemics that overload our health system.

Tin foil hat time- The use of lockdown measures eg 'non essential travel' on Catastrophic Fire Days will be discussed at parliament level next Summer.

So you're saying that the government will want to force people to stay indoors when the next Ash Wednesday rolls around?

Magellan wrote:

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:

whufc wrote:I mentioned yesterday but now that the government know they can legitimately enforce such regulations it would be a fool to suggest these measurements will only be used for 'pandemics' in the future.

Yeah, nah, not everything you read on Facebook is real.

Its got nothing to do with facebook.

After Covid-19, these measurements are a legitimate action and successful way to ease the burden on the medical system. The fact is that it isnt just pandemics that overload our health system.

Tin foil hat time- The use of lockdown measures eg 'non essential travel' on Catastrophic Fire Days will be discussed at parliament level next Summer.

So you're saying that the government will want to force people to stay indoors when the next Ash Wednesday rolls around?

They may even force us to shut our windows.

whufc wrote:I mentioned yesterday but now that the government know they can legitimately enforce such regulations it would be a fool to suggest these measurements will only be used for 'pandemics' in the future.

I wouldn't be too worried, whufc.

The government can legitimately (the key word here) enforce lockdowns at the moment because most people accept and agree with them in the wider public. People are self-enforcing them, in effect.

But they're not going to work if they're imposed willy-nilly unless (a) the public buy into it because it's in the public interest, or (b) the government can provides a sufficient show of force and policing power (like police states/totalitarian regimes, like China) where people are shit-scared of the consequences of not obeying. This is usually to enforce broader controls over the people - a show of force to remind them who's the boss.

We have a political system built around autonomy and liberty (not like China), so people didn't agree with it, they would simply disobey and protest the lockdowns en masse, and there wouldn't be enough public resources or community fear of reprisal to compel and punish people. It would not be legitimate in the eyes of the community. The political consequences for any government here seeking arbitrary lockdowns would be severe.

Magellan wrote:

whufc wrote:I mentioned yesterday but now that the government know they can legitimately enforce such regulations it would be a fool to suggest these measurements will only be used for 'pandemics' in the future.

I wouldn't be too worried, whufc.

The government can legitimately (the key word here) enforce lockdowns at the moment because most people accept and agree with them in the wider public. People are self-enforcing them, in effect.

But they're not going to work if they're imposed willy-nilly unless (a) the public buy into it because it's in the public interest, or (b) the government can provides a sufficient show of force and policing power (like police states/totalitarian regimes, like China) where people are shit-scared of the consequences of not obeying. This is usually to enforce broader controls over the people - a show of force to remind them who's the boss.

We have a political system built around autonomy and liberty (not like China), so people didn't agree with it, they would simply disobey and protest the lockdowns en masse, and there wouldn't be enough public resources or community fear of reprisal to compel and punish people. It would not be legitimate in the eyes of the community. The political consequences for any government here seeking arbitrary lockdowns would be severe.

This is the point, that should be made to the conspiracy theorists that state thinks the first step to Agenda 21 or be New World Order or that 5G has causes this or it's a bio weapon from China as part of World War 3 or it's from the big banks as part of the New World Order and one world government or some other stuff from TruthTV or the Facebook world. I haven't covered them all I don't think.

End of the day, if we all decided not to self isolate, then this lockdown wouldn't be a lockdown. Our governments are so under staffed it's not funny in terms of law enforcement.



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Bum Crack wrote:

Booney wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Not much in the way of comment from old Bum Crack in here lately...... I hope he has not succumbed to Covid-19.

More of a chance he's succumbed to Chateaux Collapso.

Funny you mention that. Been home crook the last two days. Not feeling very well at all.

You can go and get tested today then

Brodlach wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:

Booney wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Not much in the way of comment from old Bum Crack in here lately...... I hope he has not succumbed to Covid-19.

More of a chance he's succumbed to Chateaux Collapso.

Funny you mention that. Been home crook the last two days. Not feeling very well at all.

You can go and get tested today then

No Coronavirus is going to live in my body. Especially after what I consumed on the weekend.

NSW want face to face learning in classrooms about 2 weeks into the new term

Bum Crack wrote:No Coronavirus is going to live in my body. Especially after what I consumed on the weekend.

Red wine on the porch mate?

Q. wrote:If I had my way, I'd open gyms and tattoo shops as the first step in relaxing restrictions

My ink fund is growing nicely.

Booney wrote:

Bum Crack wrote:No Coronavirus is going to live in my body. Especially after what I consumed on the weekend.

Red wine on the porch mate?

Yeah that was into the 4th day of my Easter bender.

Booney wrote:

Q. wrote:If I had my way, I'd open gyms and tattoo shops as the first step in relaxing restrictions

My ink fund is growing nicely.

Ha, same. I'll be heading for a full back piece at this rate

Booney wrote:

Q. wrote:If I had my way, I'd open gyms and tattoo shops as the first step in relaxing restrictions

My ink fund is growing nicely.

Yeah, I need my butterfly finished off.

Brodlach wrote:NSW want face to face learning in classrooms about 2 weeks into the new term

Seems like a reasonable plan, especially if they are going back to school in Europe

Wedgie wrote:Anyway, an update on my position, it turns out the 8000 people that work for pubs in the ALH group miss out on Job Keeprs payment, the only pub workers that miss out. It's because a couple of months ago they merged with BWS and Dan Murphys and because those companies are still making mega bucks the ALH pub workers miss out. If I worked for any other pub group in the nation I'd be entitled but as I work for ALH I'm not which seems a bit stupid. Maybe the government should have looked at giving the money to eligible workers not eligible employers.

If they miss out on the JobKeeper they will be entitled to the JobSeeker payment which is $1100 / fortnight. It's not enough income for some, but certainly better than nothing.

Spangas wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Anyway, an update on my position, it turns out the 8000 people that work for pubs in the ALH group miss out on Job Keeprs payment, the only pub workers that miss out. It's because a couple of months ago they merged with BWS and Dan Murphys and because those companies are still making mega bucks the ALH pub workers miss out. If I worked for any other pub group in the nation I'd be entitled but as I work for ALH I'm not which seems a bit stupid. Maybe the government should have looked at giving the money to eligible workers not eligible employers.

If they miss out on the JobKeeper they will be entitled to the JobSeeker payment which is $1100 / fortnight. It's not enough income for some, but certainly better than nothing.

My eldest daughter was in the hospitality industry and lost her job but centrelink have rejected her application, they are apparently going to email her as to why, it's absolute crap as I see long term doleys cashing in and posting their bonus's on social media.

Declined for JKeeper or JSeeker?