Covid-19 Outbreak of new SARS-like coronavirus (Covid-19)

[Captain.Heroin]

My implication is that a state budget isn't like a household or personal budget and it's a mistake to think of it like one.

For one, a significant amount of the governments debt is actually owed to itself. And it's all owed in its own currency.

I'm not saying there's nothing wrong or unsustainable about government spending, I'm saying it's likely not as bad as most people think in the way they think.

We owe a lot to other countries, interest payments. It will never get paid down.

 

[JessFR]

We owe a lot to other countries, interest payments. It will never get paid down.

Again I ask, why does it matter?

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Again I ask, why does it matter?

There will be a point of no return.

 

[TheInvisibleStoner]

Funny thing is when they stop printing and dump the market. The day traders holding will pay

 

[JGrimez]

Fixed it even better :D

There's enough evidence of this even via the mainstream media at this point, so the only excuse is ignorance or brainwashing.
If you support lockdowns - you are complicit in murder.
Good luck with that on your karma.

 

[JGrimez]

Deaths at home: More than 26,000 extra this year, ONS finds

"More than 26,000 extra deaths occurred in private homes this year, an analysis by the Office for National Statistics found.

In contrast, deaths in hospitals from these causes have been lower than usual.

Between March and September 2020, there were 24,387 more deaths in England than expected in private homes, and 1,644 in Wales. The large majority did not involve Covid-19."

can you think of an extreme measure that was imposed by the govt. on the entire country, and in particular the elderly, that involved them being virtually imprisoned in their own homes during this time that an extra 26,000 (mostly elderly) died in their homes?

Suicide claimed more Japanese lives in October than 10 months of COVID

Moderna boss says COVID-19 vaccine not proven to stop spread of virus - cool makes sense....

AstraZeneca to be exempt from coronavirus vaccine liability claims in most countries

 

[JGrimez]

I get the feeling that some people would rather support tens of thousands of old people dying and hundreds of millions being pushed into poverty - than admit that JGrimez was correct about the lockdowns.

If some people don't experience first-hand the destruction and death that lockdowns are causing, then they just continue to virtue-signal by supporting lockdowns and pretend to hold the moral high ground.
TALK ABOUT PRIVILEGE.
Fake compassion.
Fake empathy.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

@JGrimez. Did you just refer to yourself in the third person?
Maybe you could stop calling people ignorant brainwashed murderers?
You're coming on a bit strong, bro.

 

[cduggles]

You're coming on a bit strong, bro.

Truth.

 

[JGrimez]

@JGrimez. Did you just refer to yourself in the third person?
Maybe you could stop calling people ignorant brainwashed murderers?
You're coming on a bit strong, bro.

Go tell the parents of kids who've committed suicide out of despair that you support the lockdowns.
Go tell the relatives of old people who were denied elective medical procedures, cancer screenings etc. all the proven extra deaths this year of the elderly, tell them that you support lockdowns.
Tell the hundreds of millions of people that are being pushed towards starvation - that you support them starving to death because you support the lockdowns.

Sorry for being emotional about the many people quietly suffering and dying while others just ignore it and go on to support the policies that are causing these deaths.
People must be accountable for which movements and policies they support.

Obviously you can choose to disagree but in my opinion anyone who now supports lockdowns will gravely regret ever having done so in the future. And the reason why is because anyone who supports lockdowns is complicit in murder. The time for debate is over as plenty of time has passed and there are mountains of reports and evidence, even articles from the mainstream media. Ignorance is no longer an excuse, stop supporting governments murdering their vulnerable citizens.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Go tell the parents of kids who've committed suicide out of despair that you support the lockdowns.
Go tell the relatives of old people who were denied elective medical procedures, cancer screenings etc. all the proven extra deaths this year of the elderly, tell them that you support lockdowns.
Tell the hundreds of millions of people that are being pushed towards starvation - that you support them starving to death because you support the lockdowns.

Sorry for being emotional about the many people quietly suffering and dying while others just ignore it and go on to support the policies that are causing these deaths.
People must be accountable for which movements and policies they support.

Obviously you can choose to disagree but in my opinion anyone who now supports lockdowns will gravely regret ever having done so in the future. And the reason why is because anyone who supports lockdowns is complicit in murder. The time for debate is over as plenty of time has passed and there are mountains of reports and evidence, even articles from the mainstream media. Ignorance is no longer an excuse, stop supporting governments murdering their vulnerable citizens.

A quarter of a million people in the US are dead. One in 500 people in New Jersey are dead. Show me the data on increased death rates due to suicide and lack of medical care, etc. Are more than a quarter of a million people dead?

Nobody is arguing that lock-down doesn't have consequences.
The question is are we better with or without them?

Countries that did lock-down early are back to normal. There's no virus where I live and people aren't dying. Show me the data that proves otherwise.

The New Zealand suicide rate hasn't gone up.

Here's a quote from an Australian article.

There’s been over 1,200 suicides since March compared to just over 200 deaths with the virus. They are the numbers we should be talking about.

This wasn't an expert opinion. The article was published on the 7th of August. That's five months. Roughly 150 days. The normal rate of suicide for Australia is 8 deaths per day. 8 x 150 = 1200.

There is a lot of misleading information out there. If Australia didn't do a lock-down, the death rate would probably be similar to the UK and France.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I haven't seen any convincing argument that more people are dying because of lock-downs being implemented. If you'd care to provide a link, I'm happy to discuss it.

...

As for your tone, you catch more flies with honey. You aren't convincing people by calling them murderers or calling them ignorant. If you really care about what you're saying, I suggest you treat people with a bit of respect.

 

[JGrimez]

The question is are we better with or without them?

Yes this is the question and the answer is clear-cut by now.

Here is some of the information you're looking for. It's best to focus on the entire world and not just NZ if you're trying to prove that lockdowns were effective:

The Truth & Common Sense About Lockdowns

 

[birdup.snaildown]

There are no statistics in that link.
It mentions the word suicide once.

I'm asking you for something specific.

ExposeLockdowns.com obviously is going to pretty biased.

You said:

Go tell the parents of kids who've committed suicide out of despair that you support the lockdowns. Go tell the relatives of old people who were denied elective medical procedures, cancer screenings etc. all the proven extra deaths this year of the elderly, tell them that you support lockdowns.

I want you to cite two things.

1) Significantly increased suicide rates.
2) Significantly increased elderly death rates that are not COVID related.

Then lets compare those numbers to the 1.4 million that have died from the China virus.

...

The link you posted isn't worth responding to at greater length, but I will comment on a few things.

The deaths per capita graphic is extremely misleading. The countries that did lock-downs didn't do them early enough and (when they did) the death rate and the new case rate significantly declined. If you're going to examine whether or not lock-downs work, clearly you need to look at the data during lock-down periods.

Peru is anomalous. If you need proof that lock-downs work, just take a look at Victoria Australia.

SWEDEN DID BETTER THAN THE HARSHEST LOCKDOWN COUNTRIES WITHOUT A LOCKDOWN OR A MASK MANDATE.

Not sure why a credible source would leave caps lock?

This statement about Sweden is untrue.
China had a very harsh lock-down (deaths / million = 3).
Mauritius had a very harsh lock-down (deaths / million = 8].
New Zealand had a very harsh lock-down (deaths / million = 5).
South Korea had a very harsh lock-down (deaths / million = 10).
Australia had a very harsh lock-down (deaths / million = 35).

Let's have a look at Scandinavia.
Denmark did a lock-down. (deaths / million = 137).
Norway did a lock-down. (deaths / million = 58].
Sweden didn't lock-down. (deaths / million = 642).

You might say, well, Sweden's economy is doing better than Norway/Denmark... but you'd be wrong. Sweden was exempt from the Scandinavian travel bubble because of their infection rate. They are actually doing worse economically than all of their neighbors.

• Sweden’s GDP fell 8.6% during the second quarter of the year, according to its statistics body.
• The fall is sharper than its neighbours – Denmark registered a 7.4% fall, and Finland a 3.2% fall. Statistics suggest Norway also fared better than Sweden.

Sweden's GDP slumped 8.6% in Q2, more sharply than its neighbors despite its no-lockdown policy

Denmark, Finland, and Norway all registered disruptions, as well as shielding their populations from COVID-19 with lockdowns.

www.businessinsider.com.au

 

[novaveritas]

A quarter of a million people in the US are dead. One in 500 people in New Jersey are dead. Show me the data on increased death rates due to suicide and lack of medical care, etc. Are more than a quarter of a million people dead?

Nobody is arguing that lock-down doesn't have consequences.
The question is are we better with or without them?

You like numbers.....the annual death rate in a population is roughly 1.4% per year, which is one in 70 dead every single year. Corona has been around in NJ for about 1 year so one in 500 is 1/7th of the total deaths.
That implies all those deaths were actually from Covid, however nowhere near all the NJ deaths assigned to covid are actually deaths from nCoV infection sequelae.
The other number you might like is one in 60 people admitted to hospital leave via the morgue even in the best of times.

NJ and NY really fucked up their initial handling of the virus, that is not in dispute, they knowingly shipped infected people into vulnerable cohorts. They aggressively ventilated weak and vulnerable patients, the rest was inevitable.

Arguing raw mortality per capita is weak justification for lockdown, the demographics and population densities in these countries are not the same the health care provision is not the same. People want simple narratives and headlines but there always many more confounders than the simple story allows for. South Korea for example has a health care system that is far more capable than the New Zealand, but they did not implement a harsh lockdown as you claim. If lockdown was as effective as you claim then there would be clear inflection signals in the curve of infections after lockdowns were introduced in various countries, there is not, indeed most lockdowns can travel back in time and cause inflection before they are implemented, this defies all known epidemiological and scientific principles.

There are a lot of conditions that coronavirus seems to have cured. during the first wave there were declines in cardio mortality, declines in renal declines in cancer deaths, Occam says given coronavirus does not cure cancer or strokes or renal failure then some these deaths must have been tagged as corona deaths. In the UK there are 50k cancer diagnoses that are missing, an increased proportion of these people will be condemnded to now die. This is entirely due to the hyperfocus on nCoV.

We are in a dangerous new world, where decrees to restrict the liberty of people are made on the basis of fear mongering models pushed by unaccountable technocrats and poor science.

The restrictions disproportionately hit people who do are not infected more than the tiny number who are.
They are fundamentally unlawful because whilst certain freedoms can be conditionally limited in extreme circumstances the test is whether the restriction passes the test of proportionality and is reasonable. Restricting liberties when there is no reason to believe the majority of people restricted are anything other than healthy is both unreasonable and disproportionate and as a consequence unlawful. The government does not have the right to infringe liberties when this simple test of reasonableness and proportionality is not met.
Quarantine is restricting the liberty of people who are diagnosed infectious and infected with a contagious illness, in order to prevent transmission, tyranny is arbitrarily restricting the liberty of people who have not been diagnosed.
The argument about whether any of the response is proportionate when the overall IFR is so low, stands too, we did not do this with influenza so why is it proportionate and reasonable to start now? The medical profession are getting seriously hacked off with all of this, they are being prevented from doing their jobs which is helping all patients not just those tagged with the disease of the day.

I suppose looking out from middle earth you see one perspective, I was talking to some NZ friends last weekend who were convinced that corona was the end of times virus with exactly the same talking points you rolled out.

If people are fearful then isolate and await the vaccine knight in shining armor, respect other people and leave everyone else to make their own decisions based on their own judgement of their risk and those of those they care about.

 

[JGrimez]

Let's play '20 questions for the UK govt':

1 Why are SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels flat or dropping across all age groups since May if the pandemic is still going?
2 What percentage of the population is assumed to have had prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in the SAGE forecasting models?
3 Why do 50% of household members not catch SARS-CoV-2 from infected persons with whom they live?
4 Why have Japan and South Korea not had any serious outbreak if the human species has no prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2?
5 What percentage of the population of the UK is assumed to be immune to COVID-19 (including prior immunity) as of this date?
6 What percentage of those diagnosed with COVID-19 since July have developed antibodies to COVID-19, confirming the diagnosis?
7 If 90%+ (SAGE Minutes: 21/09/20) of the population is still susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, why did the virus case numbers and deaths not double every 3-4 days throughout June, July and August, and indeed throughout the Autumn?
8 Why have positive test results rocketed while numbers of symptomatic patients in the community and NHS triage data show they have flatlined since mid-September?
9 Why are acute respiratory admissions through Accident & Emergency significantly below the normal for the time of year if the pandemic is still raging?
10 Why are total hospital admissions, ITU occupancy and hospital oxygen consumption at or below normal levels for the time of year?
11 What percentage of deaths labelled as being due to COVID-19 have had the diagnosis confirmed at post-mortem since July?
12 Why are the regions of the country that have had excess deaths not the same regions that have supposed COVID-19 deaths, unlike in spring?
13 Why has Liverpool testing by the Army failed to find COVID-19 in the community when they are supposedly at the centre of the alleged “second wave”?
14 How is a 0.22% rate of diagnosed infection in the public in Liverpool to be reconciled with the ONS prediction of 2.3% infection rates in Liverpool on 11th November based on PCR testing?
15 Why are much quicker lateral flow tests not being prioritised for hospital admissions to prevent the standard 24-48 hour delay with PCR results and ensure that those who are positive can be isolated to prevent hospital spread?
16 Why aren’t all staff being tested by the lateral flow test to prevent the staffing crisis being caused by false positive PCR results?
17 Do positive PCR tests for asymptomatic and symptomatic NHS staff, or anyone else, which result in them being required to self-isolate have confirmatory re-tests performed?
18 Why is the country in lockdown when there are no excess hospital admissions, no excess intensive care bed use and no excess death rates (by date of occurrence) in the midst of an allegedly out of control, raging pandemic?
19 Why are we in lockdown when the Government’s own Operation Cygnus pandemic plan stated that lockdown could only delay deaths by a few weeks at most?
20 What evidence is there that lockdown has prevented more deaths than it has caused?
https://lockdownsceptics.org/2020/11/25/latest-news-204/...

 

[Gnostic Bishop]

You should use the correct tense.



We are all very impressed.
I take it you pay more tax than you are required to?



The next is jest.

Did you understand the proof of concept?

Seems like, as you did not refute. Thanks for the thanks.

Regards
DL

 

[novaveritas]

Let's play '20 questions for the UK govt':

OK I'll play but not the UK government.

1 Why are SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels flat or dropping across all age groups since May if the pandemic is still going?

because the most significant source of antibody prevalence numbers is testing the same pool and these people are not coming into contact with the virus again because there is herd immunity in their cohort. No recent contact, no circulating virus, no real pandemic.

2 What percentage of the population is assumed to have had prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in the SAGE forecasting models?

0% whereas the reality was close to 20%

3 Why do 50% of household members not catch SARS-CoV-2 from infected persons with whom they live?

because the true attack rate is not very high or detecting asymptomatic infection is tricky the only way infected household contacts get picked up is if they have symptoms and get tested, most don't and don't.

4 Why have Japan and South Korea not had any serious outbreak if the human species has no prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2?

because SARS-1 ran through both countries and there are cross reactive immunity against some other coronaviruses sarbeco from bats so in those countries the population already had significant immunity. Both countries also did early reverse contact tracing before coronavirus became endemic which kept it away from some vulnerable parts of the population in the early days. Japan saw 70% people with antibodies, some of those probably had antibodies before nCoV turned up.

5 What percentage of the population of the UK is assumed to be immune to COVID-19 (including prior immunity) as of this date?

government claim 10%, reality is 40%+ depending of definition of immune.

6 What percentage of those diagnosed with COVID-19 since July have developed antibodies to COVID-19, confirming the diagnosis?

roughly 90% of severe cases but only a few thousand have been looked at, people who are just testing positive on a single PCR are not being looked at but they are not diagnosed. Diagnosed with Covid, needs symptoms, needs a Doctor and it is not done just on the basis of a single PCR or even multiple PCR.

7 If 90%+ (SAGE Minutes: 21/09/20) of the population is still susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, why did the virus case numbers and deaths not double every 3-4 days throughout June, July and August, and indeed throughout the Autumn?

Doubling in 3-4 days is tricky with a disease with a cycle time of 6.4 days, for the doubling to happen you have to have a high R0 >2, a load of infected and infectious people a load of susceptibles and be on the steep exponential part of the curve. None of those things were the situation in June July August. The number of infections never doubled every 3-4 days even in spring what did happen is they ran out of tests, so were extra careful to not waste the few tests available. Deaths were just tagged coronavirus.

8 Why have positive test results rocketed while numbers of symptomatic patients in the community and NHS triage data show they have flatlined since mid-September?

because PCR can see old infections and coronavirus is rather mild in the vast majority of people.

9 Why are acute respiratory admissions through Accident & Emergency significantly below the normal for the time of year if the pandemic is still raging?

magic, coronavirus also cures flu, RSV, adenonvirus, and all other ILIs. Also people with respiratory problems like asthma are avoiding hospital.

10 Why are total hospital admissions, ITU occupancy and hospital oxygen consumption at or below normal levels for the time of year?

more magic, corona is so extremely deadly people with it don't need hospitals ITU care or oxygen for long they die, or maybe not.

11 What percentage of deaths labelled as being due to COVID-19 have had the diagnosis confirmed at post-mortem since July?

practically none, post mortem investigation of suspected Covid deaths needs BSL3 precautions, pathologists are not keen.

12 Why are the regions of the country that have had excess deaths not the same regions that have supposed COVID-19 deaths, unlike in spring?

magic though that point is not strictly true, excess deaths in general were tagged as covid in Spring because it was easy. Now people die and get tagged as dead with coronavirus sometimes. Most patients in hospital with a positive coronavirus test are not there because they are suffering from Covid, they are there for other reasons but if they die they get labelled dead with coronavirus, a bit like dead with kidney or dead with eyebrows which may or may be the reason they died.

13 Why has Liverpool testing by the Army failed to find COVID-19 in the community when they are supposedly at the centre of the alleged “second wave”?

they did find 0.65% positives on the lateral flow, much less than expected by the government. Active infection with the virus was pretty rare. the people who came back from Spain with corona spread it around and it has once again died out.

14 How is a 0.22% rate of diagnosed infection in the public in Liverpool to be reconciled with the ONS prediction of 2.3% infection rates in Liverpool on 11th November based on PCR testing?

because the ONS is a model which is based on PCR data includes >75% of positives which are neither infected nor infectious at the time of testing, so it automatically is 4 times over estimating.

15 Why are much quicker lateral flow tests not being prioritised for hospital admissions to prevent the standard 24-48 hour delay with PCR results and ensure that those who are positive can be isolated to prevent hospital spread?

The lateral flow tests are hopelessly inaccurate missing 20-40% of infections and 100% of early stage infections, they can only be used if backed up by PCR. Pillar 1 in hospital PCR is usually same day. So using these tests would make little practical difference

16 Why aren’t all staff being tested by the lateral flow test to prevent the staffing crisis being caused by false positive PCR results?

the PCR positives are not false, but a PCR positive does not mean someone is infected.

17 Do positive PCR tests for asymptomatic and symptomatic NHS staff, or anyone else, which result in them being required to self-isolate have confirmatory re-tests performed?

yes and no depends on the health region, 20% of positives in pillar 1 are retested especially if they are positive at high Ct

18 Why is the country in lockdown when there are no excess hospital admissions, no excess intensive care bed use and no excess death rates (by date of occurrence) in the midst of an allegedly out of control, raging pandemic?

Without lockdown there is no stick to push people to the vaccine, otherwise piles will end up in freezers in warehouses like Tamiflu did in H1N1

19 Why are we in lockdown when the Government’s own Operation Cygnus pandemic plan stated that lockdown could only delay deaths by a few weeks at most?

magical thinking, self flagellation also works with the same efficacy.

20 What evidence is there that lockdown has prevented more deaths than it has caused?

none.

the UK Government will not answer these questions because the answers do not fit with their narrative, instead the government will censor and shut down discussion. The talking point is saying anyone who disagrees wants to kill grandma. They are good a lying, they always lie, always have and always will. There is a huge amount of money and power at stake.
No goverment that has been suckered by the technocrat lies is going to admit they got played.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Did you understand the proof of concept?

Your proof is flawed. There are many countries with higher tax and lower poverty. Therefore poverty is not created by tax. It is a factor.

Poverty is created by the tax system.

No.

 

[Xorkoth]

Strangely enough I dont know a single person who has had covid (except online of course)

I know 3 people who died including my aunt. But the US has covid all over the place now.

EDIT: after having a quick look, people with long-term effects seem to be elderly and vulnerable people... and long term effects or "long-COVID" typically lasts a couple of weeks or a couple of months.

CFC (an admin here in case you didn't know) got it, and was sick for months and still can't taste or smell properly, and has neurological problems (both are common among long-term side effects reported), involving difficulty with word recall and maybe more, I wouldn't as I'm not him, but that's what he's reported. And he's about 40 years old. Of course this doesn't say it's common for younger people to have long-term side effects, but it's a good example of it not just being the elderly and infirm.

New York state (which has the highest death rate) is under democratic legislative control.
New Jersey (second highest) is also dem... In fact, none of top 4 states (states with the worst death rates) in the US are either red states or under republican legislative control.

I see this argument being bandied about quite often: "look, the states with the most <insert problem> are Democrat run!" But large cities are generally Democrat, and large cities have different problems than smaller areas. Large cities have more crime, more homelessness, and diseases spread more easily due to population density. This is just how it works. it's not like Democrats are ruining these states, it's that when you get too many people all in the same place, shit starts to hit the fan. And most all of the large cities are Democrat run, because of various reasons it's not important to get into in this conversation.

I do not think total lockdown is a good thing. The economy needs to keep running. But I will never understand people who refuse to wear masks or practice any sort of precautionary measures. Clearly this is a disease that is dangerous, even if it's not some sort of Black Death. According to my calculations from the data I found, its death rate of under 1% still makes it about 33 times as deadly as the flu. We also don't really understand the implications of getting it, and what it could mean to a person's health down the road. So caution is the logical approach. Restrictions including mask wearing (the ability of masks to mitigate the spray of droplets when a person coughs or talks is self-explanatory, try sneezing into a piece of cloth. It gets wet. That stuff would have gone into the air. Point is clear), restrictions on the ability of too many people to be too close to each other (reducing capacity, etc), and in general just trying to avoid getting too close, getting together with too many people, etc. Draconian lockdowns do a lot of harm to the economy and to mental health, but partial lockdowns are a different story. I started out in total lockdown because my girlfriend is scared to death of it all and I didn't want her to be scared, and it was horrible. Once some time passed, though, we started to go see my bandmates who live on a farm. I had band practice still, we practiced outside when possible but I knew they were being careful like I was so it was cool. We've even played a few outdoor shows, and held 2 events on the farm, one day'/night music festivals with 30-40 people.

I am still careful. I wear my mask, I wash my hands. It's no skin off back to wear a mask, it doesn't bother me at all, why should it? it's a fucking piece of cloth on your face, who cares? Wearing a mask doesn't stop anyone from doing whatever they would otherwise be doing, yet it greatly mitigates the ease of spread if you happen to be sick, and don't realize because you're asymptomatic or have really light symptoms. I am still living my life. Americans act like we're all locked down but in most places, it's not really much of a lockdown, you can still do stuff.

Grimez you seem really concerned about America's lockdown measures, didn't your country do lockdowns and now has no virus anymore? Doesn't that mean... it works?

 

[birdup.snaildown]

I see this argument being bandied about quite often: "look, the states with the most <insert problem> are Democrat run!" But large cities are generally Democrat, and large cities have different problems than smaller areas. Large cities have more crime, more homelessness, and diseases spread more easily due to population density. This is just how it works.

I understand that those can be contributing factors, but there are plenty of countries that don't have high population densities relative to the north east coast of the US or cities the size of New York... and they still have high death rates.

On the flip-side, there are many countries that contained the virus (like Japan) that have even bigger cities and even higher population density.

What you quoted was a response to another argument, that the reason democratic states have the highest death rate is because they are under republican legislative control... which is demonstrably untrue.

I do not think total lockdown is a good thing. The economy needs to keep running.

Again, there are many countries that have done total lock-down and contained the virus that are now able to open back up. I haven't seen any widespread evidence that this destroyed their economies relative to countries who have done partial lock-downs?

The opposite appears to be true in many cases.

Draconian lockdowns do a lot of harm to the economy and to mental health

Is this an assumption?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to see the data to support it.

High death rates also have an impact on mental health. You say you know three people that died. I don't know anybody that died. I'd rather my friends and family not get sick and not die. I imagine people dying around me would be worse for my mental health than spending a couple of months in hard lock-down.

What Victoria had to go through was awful. I have friends and family there. But, I'd personally rather go through that than live in the US. Numerous people I know in Melbourne have literally said to me, "At least we don't live in the US," when talking to them about their Stage 4 restrictions.