Saint Jacinda Places Auckland In Lockdown

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
42,130
19,007
Yep. Was always likely to happen. Auckland gets medium level lockdown, the rest of the country gets told to social distance in public. Reevaluate after 3 days.

You happy we have four new community cases here? I guess this means that New Zealand fucked the response? :conf

Also - "St Jacinda" :rofl:patsch

:hat
 

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
42,130
19,007
Righties...”Lefties want everyone in America to die of Covid, just to prove Trump wrong”

Also righties...”Yay more people in New Zealand are getting Covid, so that proves their lefty government wrong”
Yep. Look at these idiots wanking themselves stupid. Hypocrite cunts. :rolleyes

:hat
 

Jack

P4P Star
Jul 29, 2012
9,409
3,936
This is the problem when the subject at hand becomes so politicised and the stricter the reaction is, the more morally virtuous the proponents seem. There is no regard at all for the negative repercussions caused by their actions, such as the recent story which highlighted that 6.5% of children in New Zealand will fall into poverty, the impending loss of life caused by health care being disrupted, unemployment which is expected to fall to 9% and so on.

And then the defenders of this will say "yeah, but we're doing better than you". Great, except that New Zealand is a country which should have been able to have the best of both worlds, very few cases and very little repercussions caused by the lockdown measures, yet because their government is so keen to seem virtuous, they put in measures which are far greater than what they're trying to prevent.

There's no question about it, the government handling of coronavirus in some countries - New Zealand included - will cost more lives than it saves, yet because there's such intense fear about coronavirus, people have lost sight about the heart disease, diabetes, depression, TB, cancer etc. issues which will cause massive loss of life in their countries. Speaking purely about Covid-19, one thing that we know plays a significant part in fighting the virus is Vitamin D, so enforcing strict lockdowns that leave people with a Vitamin D deficiency is a counter productive way to go about things.

As I've always said, there needs to be a balance, the mentality that many seem to have would be akin to banning cars because traffic accidents cause fatalities. Lockdowns which are too strict or not strict enough will cost lives, and there should be repercussions towards those who make those decisions. Unfortunately, the world is so obsessed with Covid-19 that people have lost sight of the deaths by other methods that were avoidable. Even if you ignore the personal freedom/responsibility issue and focus purely on the health benefits, steps like what Ardern has put into place are just as detrimental as allowing carte blanche reopenings, but when that ticking time bomb of cancer starts to blow up in a few years time, will she still be seen in the same virtuous way she is now? I very much doubt it, she'll have blood on her hands because of her overzealous, virtue signalling decision which was completely excessive to the threat posed.
 

Bachafach^^^

ANTIFA *funded by Soros* cucking the fash
Dec 6, 2019
6,934
5,176
20
Varaždin, Hrvaška
This is the problem when the subject at hand becomes so politicised and the stricter the reaction is, the more morally virtuous the proponents seem. There is no regard at all for the negative repercussions caused by their actions, such as the recent story which highlighted that 6.5% of children in New Zealand will fall into poverty, the impending loss of life caused by health care being disrupted, unemployment which is expected to fall to 9% and so on.

And then the defenders of this will say "yeah, but we're doing better than you". Great, except that New Zealand is a country which should have been able to have the best of both worlds, very few cases and very little repercussions caused by the lockdown measures, yet because their government is so keen to seem virtuous, they put in measures which are far greater than what they're trying to prevent.

There's no question about it, the government handling of coronavirus in some countries - New Zealand included - will cost more lives than it saves, yet because there's such intense fear about coronavirus, people have lost sight about the heart disease, diabetes, depression, TB, cancer etc. issues which will cause massive loss of life in their countries. Speaking purely about Covid-19, one thing that we know plays a significant part in fighting the virus is Vitamin D, so enforcing strict lockdowns that leave people with a Vitamin D deficiency is a counter productive way to go about things.

As I've always said, there needs to be a balance, the mentality that many seem to have would be akin to banning cars because traffic accidents cause fatalities. Lockdowns which are too strict or not strict enough will cost lives, and there should be repercussions towards those who make those decisions. Unfortunately, the world is so obsessed with Covid-19 that people have lost sight of the deaths by other methods that were avoidable. Even if you ignore the personal freedom/responsibility issue and focus purely on the health benefits, steps like what Ardern has put into place are just as detrimental as allowing carte blanche reopenings, but when that ticking time bomb of cancer starts to blow up in a few years time, will she still be seen in the same virtuous way she is now? I very much doubt it, she'll have blood on her hands because of her overzealous, virtue signalling decision which was completely excessive to the threat posed.
14625
 
Reactions: AndrewFFC
Jul 6, 2019
6,994
7,322
I don't know much about politics in New Zealand.

Does their political system allow her to act this way?

Does she have the support of the elected politicians of the country?

Does she have the support of the majority of the population?

Is this information freely available to the people of New Zealand?

Do the people have the option to oppose this, or to replace their leader?


If the answers to theses questions are yes then she is not a dictator. She is just an elected official enacting measures that you disagree with.
 

Setanta

BAD MOTHERFUCKER
May 24, 2013
8,347
3,564
Emain Macha

Well, judging by the state of the virus in NZ and the UK, she has definitely done a hell of a lot better job at dealing with the pandemic than the hapless (and combless) Boris.


Given the comparison of the degree and quality of leadership demonstrated, I think your post could be filed away under the ERNIE SHOOTS SELF IN FOOT (AGAIN) category.
 

Clarence Worley

leaner than mandy...
Nov 19, 2018
8,205
5,719
Siberia
Absurd to compare the countries. New Zealand is the default place the Uber rich want to wait shit out ... to such extent they had to legislate against it
 

Wordup

Stranges creatures, women.
May 16, 2013
6,274
2,924
Rotherham, South Yorkshire
There's no question about it, the government handling of coronavirus in some countries - New Zealand included - will cost more lives than it saves
Has that happened so far? Have the non-covid deaths caused by the lockdown outstripped COVID deaths in New Zealand? Where is your (reliable) source?

yet because there's such intense fear about coronavirus, people have lost sight about the heart disease, diabetes, depression, TB, cancer etc. issues which will cause massive loss of life in their countries.
What number equates to a massive loss of life? And what (reliable) evidence is there to say there will be a massive loss of life in New Zealand from diabetes caused by the COVID-19 Lockdown?

Speaking purely about Covid-19, one thing that we know plays a significant part in fighting the virus is Vitamin D, so enforcing strict lockdowns that leave people with a Vitamin D deficiency is a counter productive way to go about things.
No scientists don't know that, scientist think it might help...
From a mechanistic angle, there are good reasons to postulate that vitamin D favourably modulates host responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), both in the early viraemic and later hyperinflammatory phases of COVID-19.
But nothing has been proven...
A number of hospital-based treatment trials have been registered to date, but it may prove challenging to detect a signal for vitamin D supplementation in severe COVID-19 for two reasons. First, patients tend to present to hospital in the hyperinflammatory stage of the disease, so it might be too late for them to benefit from any antiviral effects induced by vitamin D supplementation. Second, it could be hard to show the effect of a micronutrient over and above dexamethasone, which has potent anti-inflammatory actions and now represents the standard of care in severe disease.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(20)30268-0/fulltext

So again, scientists don't yet know that Vitamin D plays a significant part in fighting the virus at all.