|
Yeah Nah? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yeah Nah |
|
122 | 53.51% |
| Nah Yeah |
|
64 | 28.07% |
| Nah Yee |
|
18 | 7.89% |
| No Yes |
|
9 | 3.95% |
| Yes No |
|
15 | 6.58% |
| Total: | 228 votes | ||
|
CAT INTERCEPTOR posted:The fact you are going on with a frankly incomprehensible argument about economics against mandatory mask wearing is leading me to believe that. On the other hand, I wouldn’t say NSW needs to weld people into their houses right now, would you? If we can agree that preventative actions can be useful in one circumstance and excessive in another, then can we not discuss just how important a mask mandate is or isn’t in the exact context of the NSW outbreak without resorting to name calling or political litmus tests where anyone who doesn’t think you’re completely right in every way is a bad person? We have an argument made above for why everyone should wear a mask all the time to prevent flu. But I was happy not wearing a mask outside work pre-pandemic, and I don’t intend to wear masks all day every day in a longed-for future where the pandemic is gone, do you?.
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2021 23:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw-put-rest-of-country-at-risk-by-playing-the-odds-on-masks-ama-says-20210101-p56r91.html "Australia’s peak medical group says the NSW government has put the rest of the country at risk by its decision not to go “hard and early” in its response to the outbreak on Sydney's northern beaches, which is suspected to have seeded cases in Victoria. " Lmao "AMA president Dr Omar Khorshid said he believed Victoria should have closed its borders to NSW sooner, saying the significant period of time between the transmission event at the Thai restaurant on December 21 and when cases were first detected on Wednesday afternoon, nine days later, was a concern. “Maybe this can be jumped on, but there is so much prospect of it being back out there, it’s really scary,” Dr Khorshid said. The AMA has called for the NSW government to make masks mandatory indoors and have criticised a decision to allow about 20,000 people to attend the Sydney cricket Test" A brave move for the AMA to support compulsory masks indoors when this would hurt both bus drivers and the economy TammyHEH fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Jan 2, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:
Would this stop you from posting?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:On the other hand, I wouldn’t say NSW needs to weld people into their houses right now, would you? Speak for yourself. Whatever is needed to contain the Sydney virus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:01
|
|
|
hooman posted:I just had a thought experiment, ignoring covid, because of the precautions we took, we basically eliminated this year's flu season. So what's the economic cost of having a flu season? What needs to be proved here is that masks would prevent a lot of seasonal flu. Lockdowns and increased hand hygiene are also hugely responsible for the reduction in flu burden this year, possibly much more so than the sporty mask use that NSW has seen. The same argument in the opposite direction could be used against what I said earlier about the cost benefit of masking against COVID in the current outbreak, you could say that masks will prevent thousands of cases rather than dozens or hundreds. But my premise there was that there is every chance that contact tracing will bring the virus back to zero here, as it did with the Crossroads cluster, putting a ceiling on the number of cases that universal masks could possibly prevent. If you think that the NSW outbreak is going to burn on into thousands of or tens of thousand of cases then I’d agree mandatory masks are almost certainly a good idea, but if we think that then we should just have a lockdown now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
hambeet posted:I’m a posting professional Can we get The Artificial Kid a discord invite? Mr Bell died of self-inflicted injuries in his cell at Casuarina prison on 9 September, four months after being convicted and sentenced to 27 years in jail for a horrific crime involving a child. At his sentencing hearing in May 2015, his lawyer said Bell believed he would be killed in prison. News of his death appeared on the front page of the West Australian newspaper. He was placed on at-risk and suicide management systems at various points in custody but was not on either at the time of his death. His family requested that prison guards wear body cameras, and the WA Department of Corrective Services said it was working towards that goal. ISSUES RAISED Medical care required but not all given, mental health / cognitive impairment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:09
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:Let me address this again more sensibly, now that I have had a moment to break out of accepting the premise. one reason your cost benefit analysis is super dumb is because the cost is borne by private individuals so it's not like theres much opportunity cost for different health measures as the like 5 bucks for a mask that many people have already spend would otherwise just go to private expenditures
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:16
|
|
|
10 locally transmitted cases in Victoria in the last day, traced back to the NSW outbreak.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:18
|
|
|
Breakfast Burrito posted:one reason your cost benefit analysis is super dumb is because the cost is borne by private individuals so it's not like theres much opportunity cost for different health measures as the like 5 bucks for a mask that many people have already spend would otherwise just go to private expenditures
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:20
|
|
|
It isn't the "masks aren't necessary yet" bit that's weird, it's that you're analysing it through a purely financial lens. The sensible arguments against imposing masks are that they're an imposition on people's daily lives, mandating something means enforcing it and marginalised community members are the ones most likely to be fined, most transmission occurs in venues where people aren't going to be masked anyway (restaurants and private gatherings) and they provide a security blanket which can make some people lax about other stuff like social distancing. (I don't necessarily agree with those arguments, but those are the arguments.) The negative consequences on the other side of the ledger are, if the virus gets out of control, it's an even greater imposition on people's lives as we go into lockdown and can also lead to hundreds or thousands of deaths and long-term illnesses. What isn't sensible is calculating the cost of masks as spread over the public as a whole in comparison with the ~*~Economic Impact~*~ of further cases and an outbreak growing, unless you're a policy wonk sitting in the Treasury basement with a calculator and a spreadsheet. I don't give a gently caress about the $20-$30 I spent on a bunch of reuseable masks earlier this year and I don't give a gently caress about Australia's GDP growth for the next quarter. I do give a gently caress about whether I can continue safely living my day-to-day life and visit family interstate again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
gently caress the cost roll out the masks and lockdown NSW
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:How is a mandatory cost borne by everyone different from a government expenditure except in name? It's essentially a cumbersome, hard-to-enforce tax. I'd much rather our government stand tall, tax us more and allocate the money openly to the most cost effective intervention (whether that be masks, paying people to stay home or whatever). yeah, but a lot of people already own masks so the cost isn't what you think it is and also I'm specifically responding to your dumb back of the envelope cost/benefit of mask mandates and pointing out why your reasoning is wrong, not this new point of "government spending being as effective as possible" you've retreated to which anyone would agree with?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
No one owns masks here
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:45
|
|
|
nocturama posted:No one owns masks here how dare u I thought we were friends (but also is that true? seems dumb but also nsw so 
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
Sorry its true. Im not sure whether mask mandate is called for or not. Im risk averse so i think they should have done more, earlier but what do i know
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/drvyom/status/1345143679279796224?s=20 Fantastic news. Next few days will still be important.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
freebooter posted:It isn't the "masks aren't necessary yet" bit that's weird, it's that you're analysing it through a purely financial lens. I thought the inconvenience went without saying, and is hard to quantify, and is the part I personally have the least sympathy with because I've spent plenty of time masked up for hours at a time, and it's fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
Breakfast Burrito posted:yeah, but a lot of people already own masks so the cost isn't what you think it is and also I'm specifically responding to your dumb back of the envelope cost/benefit of mask mandates and pointing out why your reasoning is wrong, not this new point of "government spending being as effective as possible" you've retreated to which anyone would agree with?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:01
|
|
|
'The wealthy' don't pay their fair share of taxes, so shifting the cost of masks to a tax would just mean adding layer of inefficiency between poor people paying their money and getting their masks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I think everything rests on how successful you think the contact tracing will be. If contact tracing will bring us back to zero cases after another hundred cases, or a few hundred, or a thousand cases, then that's the maximum number of cases that mandatory masking could possibly prevent (in that particular future). On the other hand if you think contact tracing is going to fail completely (as in cases get so numerous that contact tracing can't keep up, like in Victoria's second wave), then we should just lock down now to prevent that early. In between is the needle-eye where mandatory masking makes a difference. So how many cases are sitting in that space waiting to be saved by masks? How many futures are there where contact tracing didn't work but WOULD have worked if only mandatory masking had been in place to put just enough drag on the R number? you're trying to do the most efficient thing possible in advance when you can't because there are so many unknowns. masks are a cheap measure that is at least somewhat effective so I don't know why you wouldn't do it, when you have a situation like nsw where you must assume there are some cases out there you're not aware of? Even at the very least to help the contact tracers because less spread due to masks = less work for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
hooman posted:I just had a thought experiment, ignoring covid, because of the precautions we took, we basically eliminated this year's flu season. So what's the economic cost of having a flu season? Does this not assume that you buy a mask only once and use it for the rest of your life? Needs further work to refine imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
Tommunist posted:https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw-put-rest-of-country-at-risk-by-playing-the-odds-on-masks-ama-says-20210101-p56r91.html This makes the national AMA and the NSW AMA, which said the same thing about masks a few days ago, as well as the epidemiologists going on about it. They're probably ignorant as to the needle-eye between contact tracing and lockdowns
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:27
|
|
My first car was a stick
|
Masks are now mandatory in most indoor environments in Greater Sydney, with a $200 fine for non compliance. Also Gladys is going on holidays now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:36
|
|
|
Yeast posted:Masks are now mandatory in most indoor environments in Greater Sydney, with a $200 fine for non compliance. That's a good punchline.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
Can't wait to see the leaked photo of her at a big party where nobody has a mask on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:44
|
|
|
You can make a case for masks one way or the other in a situation like Sydney's, but what's weird is umming and ahhing about it for two weeks before eventually pulling the trigger. Just loving do it. If the cases fizzled out by Boxing Day and everything turned out to be fine anyway, nobody is going to whinge that you overreacted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:55
|
|
|
ACT announced a closed border yesterday, starting in five minutes and we're definitely gonna have our first real outbreak comin' up due to like four or five people actually being born here and everyone fucks off for Christmas
The Peccadillo fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Jan 2, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:57
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:What needs to be proved here is that masks would prevent a lot of seasonal flu. Lockdowns and increased hand hygiene are also hugely responsible for the reduction in flu burden this year, possibly much more so than the sporty mask use that NSW has seen. Yeah, it's almost like a strictly financial analysis is a poor and inherently reductive way to make decisions about public health. EDIT: freebooter posted:What isn't sensible is calculating the cost of masks as spread over the public as a whole in comparison with the ~*~Economic Impact~*~ of further cases and an outbreak growing, unless you're a policy wonk sitting in the Treasury basement with a calculator and a spreadsheet. I don't give a gently caress about the $20-$30 I spent on a bunch of reuseable masks earlier this year and I don't give a gently caress about Australia's GDP growth for the next quarter. I do give a gently caress about whether I can continue safely living my day-to-day life and visit family interstate again. This.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 01:57
|
|
|
freebooter posted:You can make a case for masks one way or the other in a situation like Sydney's, but what's weird is umming and ahhing about it for two weeks before eventually pulling the trigger. Just loving do it. If the cases fizzled out by Boxing Day and everything turned out to be fine anyway, nobody is going to whinge that you overreacted. Australians are short sighted as hell and if we don't get bit we'll keep shoving our hand back in the dog's mouth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:01
|
|
|
hooman posted:Yeah, it's almost like a strictly financial analysis is a poor and inherently reductive way to make decisions about public health.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:02
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I never called for a strictly financial analysis. Financial cost is just one component of a cost-benefit analysis. But the inconvenience of masks is pretty small, and pretty hard to quantify, and the negative health impacts are likely negligible (unless someone discovers that they cause crippling depression or PTSD or something). I've never heard of a healthcare worker who "couldn't wear a mask" at work. The Artificial Kid posted:Well, if it cost everyone an average of 10c per day (which I think is a very conservative estimate), and went on for six weeks, that would be $22 million. How many cases will it prevent? That's very hard to estimate, but if we imagine that the current test-and-trace program is on track to eliminate the outbreak after another 100 cases, and the masks bring it down to 50 cases, then that's $500,000 per case. Could have fooled me chief.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:05
|
|
|
hooman posted:Could have fooled me chief.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:39
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:What factors do you want to specifically introduce into the analysis to shatter my [sarcasm]rock solid conclusion[/sarcasm] that masks may or may not be a cost-efficient intervention? Are there amazing benefits to masks other than preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses? Do they put a spring in every step and a song in every heart? Do they prevent osteoarthritis or lower infant mortality? What are the non-financial factors that you think are desperately missing from my internet forum comment that universal masking might or might not be a financially expensive way to prevent cases in a low-case environment where effective contact tracing is in play? Look u got owned by gladys its time to stop
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:44
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:What factors do you want to specifically introduce into the analysis to shatter my [sarcasm]rock solid conclusion[/sarcasm] that masks may or may not be a cost-efficient intervention? Are there amazing benefits to masks other than preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses? Do they put a spring in every step and a song in every heart? Do they prevent osteoarthritis or lower infant mortality? What are the non-financial factors that you think are desperately missing from my internet forum comment that universal masking might or might not be a financially expensive way to prevent cases in a low-case environment where effective contact tracing is in play? Gotta say I appreciate your effort posting and willingness to engage on a contentious topic. There’s a few posters engaging back in good faith but also a fair number of posters who aren’t.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:55
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:What factors do you want to specifically introduce into the analysis to shatter my [sarcasm]rock solid conclusion[/sarcasm] that masks may or may not be a cost-efficient intervention? Are there amazing benefits to masks other than preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses? Do they put a spring in every step and a song in every heart? Do they prevent osteoarthritis or lower infant mortality? What are the non-financial factors that you think are desperately missing from my internet forum comment that universal masking might or might not be a financially expensive way to prevent cases in a low-case environment where effective contact tracing is in play? My general problem isn't with the specifics of your analysis (though there are defs some areas for improvement), my problem is with the analysis existing in the first place and you making an argument that "we could save lives, but we shouldn't because that would just be soooo expensive". If that wasn't your intent in your post, that's fine, but that's exactly how it read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 02:59
|
|
|
Yeast posted:Also Gladys is going on holidays now. She should ask Scotty what kind of deal he got for his Hawaii trip.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 03:12
|
|
|
Interested to know how much artist kid thinks a life is worth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:Are there amazing benefits to masks other than preventing the spread of respiratory illnesses? you can buy a mask that looks rad as gently caress and pretend you are a cyber punk
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 03:24
|
|
|
SHALASHASKA HAWKE posted:Interested to know how much artist kid thinks a life is worth. quote:I'm not that, and I'm drawing on what I've learned about public health. Refusing to analyse interventions in terms of cost-benefit is not an act of charity, it's a sure way to misallocate resources and do less good than you otherwise could have. You think saying "that would cost $500,000 per case avoided" is a way of saying "I don't want to save lives", but it's also the first step towards saying "...and we could keep 8 people on dialysis for a year with that money". And $500,000 per case avoided means $25+ million per life saved, which would be enough to set up a whole dialysis unit and run it for years. Which is the better thing to do? Cost-benefit analysis helps us know. I get the sense you've decided I'm a poo poo human being and your enemy, but I don't think we are enemies, if you care about helping people. Edit: I’m not saying I agree with his numbers, but y’all are jumping down his throat at the mere mention of a “cost-benefit analyses” without acknowledging the fact that he has specifically raised a question that there may be a possibility that the finite pool^ of money *might* be better spent elsewhere to save more lives. ^Finite pool: this finite pool would be much larger if we taxed the rich appropriately but being pragmatic with the funds that are available (irrespective of how inadequate they are to begin with) should be a given. And yes, mask costs are borne by the public at the moment, but they should be borne by the government. Some of you have lost touch of your roots if you think that dropping a few bucks on masks may be financially not viable for some more unfortunate people Paracetamol fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Jan 2, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
I dont think u get the posting of brother hawk
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2021 03:28
|
|