mardigras

Awesome, I like trains. So give us the numbers of unemployment and economic devastation in Australia. Must be rosy there. Please tell us. Perhaps consider these ones as well for Sweden, and let us know which part of the lock down over there, is causing the job loss reported for March - before things started get much worse there. So over 18,000 in the last week of March. Imagine if they had a lockdown. This from Sweden's head of their employment service for March this year. So far over 36,000 people have been given notice that they are to be laid off, over half of those in the last week alone. This is ten times higher than the same month last year. It is also the highest number of job cuts for a single month since records began.” .

He's a great source of information and I understand he still will be - just not for Sky.

My modelling suggests the period between now and August is not going to do anything for the industry overall. What - about 100 - 120 races between now and then according to the daft calendar? I think the time would have been better spent formulating a plan as to how to get racing up on its feet, full stop. Easier done in my view if racing hasn't just resumed along the lines of where it was at. Major changes I am talking about. Handicapping, scheduling, stake distribution, management/admin, track management, integrity. Clean break and start with a new understanding and a new way of doing things. They had 5 moths to get that sorted (or at least started) - instead we have a daft calendar a 5yo could have put together in half an hour. I guess I was expecting more - but that's just showing I'm dumb like ATA says.

My opinion is based on my analysis of the data and many years modelling data.

That's your opinion. I'd say we modelled our own data. I think the right decision was made. Just my opinion of course.

Data from countries that haven't gone into lockdown. And common sense. We are an international tourism country. The lockdown isn't affecting that. There wouldn't be any. And the fear that exists from the virus - would curtail a lot of spending, a lot of hospitality spend and a lot of local tourism. As well as a lot of spending in other areas. Business would struggle. As I say, common sense. The lockdown may well have saved many, as opposed to the opposite. Of that, we may never know. On what data do you base yours?

When it comes to your views, I prefer being dumb. So thanks. Are you saying, if there was no lockdown, the economy wouldn't be going to lose all the jobs and all the rest of it. I hope you are not going to say that - it was inevitable. Imagine if we were all going to work, where's the tourism? Where's the hospitality coming from. She'll be right. Sure. Ask Sweden why things are going down the gurgler.

As they have (and will) in places all over the world - including those with lesser restrictions. My opinion is that the lockdown has had little overall impact on that - except possibly delayed it even.

They may have made more people sick than otherwise. I'd expect that was part of the overall decision based on the information provided by scientists etc.

My bakery has noticed that the available yeast is causing major sickness in people. So instead of maintaining my bakery at full production, I curb it back to ensure it only uses yeast that meets the quality criteria. That has me running my bakery at 15% of normal capacity. Even though I am making a lot less money and my business is running at very low levels of capacity. As the yeast issue is overcome, I can start to increase the production level, and make more product. When the yeast issue is fully overcome, I'll resume my bakery at full speed. I'd rather lose some bakery sales now, than make a bunch of people more sick from eating my products, due to my poor decision.

Because you're suggesting they needed to male a decision that would keep occupancy at the same levels. They needed to make decisions that were overall in the best interests of the country. Welfare of virus cases, welfare of non virus patients, welfare of the economy, welfare of education etc etc. Not whether they could keep occupancy of their hospitals at 85% or whatever the norm is.

As I say, there are phone lines available. You won't be satisfied unless the beds are full with either Covid cases or patients with other requirements. I'm sure you could have come up with just the right decisions to make that balance happen. Anyone would think having full hospitals was actually a goal. Now you're complaining about our systems. When decisions were made, our systems were what they were. Did you want them to make different decision on the basis that they should have better systems? That would have worked out well.

What is crap is the relevance the current occupancy has as to the effectiveness of the decision making.

But that tells me a level of prediction, not a 'will happen'. It's not going to be exact. Hence why different scientists have suggested variant things in the case of this situation. And I'd say that type of analysis is being done to determine the eventual outcomes here. What makes you think it hasn't been done that way? You're suggesting that low deaths and hospital occupancy means the decisions have been poor. I have no idea why since you can't measure what they would have been under any other scenario, you can only use the information available at the time to help you make the best decision. Next time we'll get the government to make decisions that actually fill the beds up.

There is no data out there that will tell you what will happen in the future based on doing x. None.

What's the assumption? That 2 weeks is hardly a major. The same type of assumption that if you disagree, that you are making. It's all just opinion.

Well Australia protected their borders pretty quickly. Good on them. My question is, why worry about whether you can ride a horse fast or not. What's the rush. Why not just wait until Level 2? Two weeks (if that is as expected), is hardly a major. It's not like NZ racing is going to be all go on the daft, I mean draft schedule.

Lockdown getting to you chief? I'm sure there are some numbers available for you to ring and have a chat. Might help.

Such is the way things are going to be. Time to diversify, redeploy, reskill.

They're saving the kitchen knives for when the restaurants are up and running and filled to the brim.

My stance is unrelated to whether the virus is a hoax or not. I have no absolute feeling either way, other than to feel it is definitely more severe than a cold. But likely not much massively worse than the flu. My stance on the economy is that it was going to be massively hit, irrespective of what the government did. That will become evident once the government implemented lockdown is over when the true impact of what is going on globally will hit home. Our government isn't involved with that.

Certainly will. There will be economic devastation no doubt, it just won't be because of any lockdown. And history will definitely show that. I guess anything you disagree with is a hoax and fuelled by propagada. And anything you agree with isn't. Interesting.

I'd say that's the biggest hoax - and it looks like you've fallen for it. You went on about how gullible people were. And here we are. Economic ruin - yeah, from the lockdown. Sure.

Talk about a hoax. What bollocks. What damage is the lockdown doing. Peanuts.

About as much bullshit as the article you put up. And it's odd how they all died from old age in the last two or three weeks. Hoax or not, NZ economically isn't being any more impacted than without the lockdown. Just enjoy the break if you're here. Unemployment/outlook - all the same either way. Is it only a hoax in NZ - or is it a hoax everywhere?