Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Part IX- Now Featuring More Lockdowns
- Thread starter BertCorbeau
- Start date
- Status
this is not true at all. Premiers in Australia lockdown their cities ie: Melbourne. Lockdowns are a provincial mandate there is no blame on federal government’s for that.
The Hanging Jowl
Registered User
- Apr 2, 2017
- 10,934
- 12,507
Daycare and pharmacare are provincial responsibilities too yet the feds seem to have no problem recently unilaterally announcing national programs in those departments without provincial consultation. They've also announced layered carbon taxes that several provinces have objected to without consultation and finally have recently signed onto a UN mandate for indigenous land rights that several provinces have objected to without consultation. This is all in the last 2 weeks BTW. Seems the feds have no issue whatsoever telling the provinces how to run things within their normal mandate.
Anyone interested in the subject of Vitamin D as it pertains to COVID should check out this article:
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj...bNOzHRxgnGxlqKUG87v2hIJvaIaHSEFDsm7m3CZx_Rp5w
A lot to digest here but it’s rather fascinating.
John Tory considering more restrictions for locked down Toronto
This should have done when the lockdown was first put in place. I hate seeing that it had to get to this. As the Mayor said too many are still out and about with no care.
This should have done when the lockdown was first put in place. I hate seeing that it had to get to this. As the Mayor said too many are still out and about with no care.
If nobody listens to the media how to you suggest they get people to understand and do their part.
Eventually it will occur to the decision makers if we locked down everything but true essentials this virus may have been contained, through contact tracing. It is and always was lockdown everything or do nothing, middle of the road leaves us with no winners.
Close big box stores, offices, pay for sick days
You know do something that takes this virus seriously
Agreed. That study that I posted a link to would work as well.
Stanford University did a study and found if all businesses were kept to 20% capacity it would reduce Covid spread by 80%. I would hope that once the lockdowns end that they would use that as the limit businesses could run at.
I think it's too late now, we won't get control of this until the warmer months arrive. I also predict when the warmer months do get here and cases start declining we will hear. We told you these measures would work, or something to that effect. I believe this will be a seasonal thing from now on.
IMO none of that would work as shown by the amount of people still moving around in Toronto while in lockdown. My answer to solve a lot of this is to start cracking down on those who break the rules. Giving out warnings hasn't worked.
I'm not worried about trucks coming into Canada as for the most part so don't believe Covid spread comes from them. We need them to keep supply chains going.
IMO I think once Christmas is over they are going to lock us down all over again
Well if what you are thinking is indeed true, U S truckers should pass on whatever they are doing to avoid Covid to the rest of the Americans.
I believe the number of truckers coming into Canada is a large enough sample size to reflect the same percentage of infection as the rest of the country has.
Do people genuinely not understand that this is a highly contagious, yet mostly non-lethal, virus? We are never going to have zero cases. No matter how long or strict the lockdown, we will see cases spike again. We are not on an island like Australia or New Zealand. The virus is here to stay, the sooner people understand that, the quicker we can move forward.
People in here talking about stricter punishments or “cracking down” on small businesses for trying to survive and Canadian citizens for living their lives is ridiculous.
People in here talking about stricter punishments or “cracking down” on small businesses for trying to survive and Canadian citizens for living their lives is ridiculous.
I understand that it's a highly contagious virus. What many seem to gloss over is that for the virus to spread you need people to do it. If you limit the amount of social interaction people have it should lower the spread.
If people would just limit their social interactions on their own there wouldn't have to be lock downs.
There may have always had to be lockdowns but they could have been localized and for minimal times. For example back when contact tracing was possible. If a grocery store employee got covid, that whole store should have been shutdown immediately. Every employee in the place that day had to isolate Immediately. Even in a worst-case scenario, the place could reopen in two weeks. Now it is too widespread to do contact tracing and many places will be closed for half a year instead.
Ok, but everybody’s situation is unique. There obviously should be some restrictions/guidelines that business should follow (assuming they’re based on science and backed by publicly accessible data).
That being said, when you talk about cracking down on people visiting their families or friends - you’re walking a dangerous and authoritative path. We’re only having a small Christmas dinner with immediate family this year rather than the typical large gathering in other years. That’s a decision we made as a family taking all factors under consideration (I.e. having an older family member who is high-risk). Ultimately, that decision should rest in the hands of individuals and their families. I personally feel that the government has no right to intervene.
I get it, some people are just being reckless fools. But this isn’t Ebola we’re talking about here. Some families may be comfortable with the risk that this virus carries, others may not. That should be left to a personal choice IMO.
It doesn't stop the spread but it lessens how severe Covid is if you get it. By doing that we can drop restrictions.
BertCorbeau
F*ck cancer - RIP Fugu and Buffaloed
Give people an inch and they'll take a foot .. It's pretty evident people (collectively) can't help themselves and there is a large portion that are completely reckless. A bold line is needed. That's because you can't really help the reckless, but you can influence those in the middle who are heeding some level of caution (like you and I) to be more cautious. The super risk averse will stay the same.
People were given the choice when restrictions lifted, and things blew up again.
Folks are getting too literal with reading these restrictions. Seeing through the lines should tell you the the government knows they cannot stop everyone from seeing their families. They can only hope that they limit the number of larger family gatherings and stop extended family gatherings. That those are being cautious in these situations to keep social distancing and wear masks if needed.
Really it comes down to socializing responsibly to minimize risk. But there are just too many morons out there who are irresponsible that ruin it for the rest of us, that puts the government in a position to take a harder line.
Rather than make blanket closures we should have just closed places where there was an infection. There was no need to close every hair salon in Toronto when we could have just closed the ones where there was a problem. Even at that the problem Hair salon would have only had to be closed two weeks tops to get cleared. If all employees tested negative a week later, open up.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
MacKinnon, Nelson, Coyle or Barkov, Bennett, Lundell?- Latest: Conspiracy Theorist