CoronaVirus ==> Empty Shelves

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by riverbuilder

Latest estimates by whom?[/Coronavirus: Bali coronavirus cases set to explode, Indonesia could have 250,000 undetected cases


make of that what you will 路♂️

---

What I make of that is that the article failed to include the qualifying words, "worst-case scenario" or other highly relevant caveats.

viz: Assoc Professor Flasche at School of Tropical Medicine in London said "it was difficult to predict how the spread of coronavirus would escalate in Indonesia in the coming weeks, without knowing what measures were put in place to contain the virus".

When asked about the possibility of 1 million cases in Indonesia by the end of April, he said given the size of Indonesia's population it "may make a semi-reasonable, worst-case scenario". Source.

There are too many flaws in the article to have any credence, like stating that "modelling by Indonesian researchers suggests half the nation’s 275 million people could be infected in the next few months", without citing where that came or any qualification that might have been included by the researchers, then using the interview by ABC journalists with Prof Flasche to give those 'estimates' validity, yet Flasche gives a worst-case scenario of 1m by the end of April and also a caveat about what measures Indonesia might put in place to contain the virus.

The Indonesians are not lab rats that have no agency in this crisis. Although late to respond, they will and in their own fashion.

I agree with Graeme, lazy and shoddy 'so-called' journalism! Reading her profile has said it all for me... "She is a news reporter for news.com.au but also has a penchant for crime and the bizarre"!

There is no doubt that Indonesia does have major challenges ahead, but the last thing they need is this type of sensationalism from the south. If News would like to focus on a near neighbour they can stop fretting over a popular tourist destination for Australians, like Bali, and turn their attention to PNG for which we have some responsibility. The challenges there will be a magnitude more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Just some light relief

Warning lots of rude words.
Well actually just one starting with F.


Facebook

Cheers Matt.

---

Ah . . . . linka, she's notta working'a

There’s some clever people out there

YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

Ah . . . . linka, she's notta working'a

---

Too many video calls to the old country recently Bob?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DomAU

I agree with the last part. The government shouldn't be bailing out the corporates, including the banks. I agree that the government shouldn't be handing out money to anyone. I also believe that the market should determe the interest rate - not be manipulated by central banks - which is the cause of most of the mess we are in.

---

Is that a change of mind or does the “anyone” above mean other that individuals ?

In Post #758 you say all should get a handout .

Not criticising, just interested in the discussion on handouts and a range of views.

I don’t get it now as I’m working but if I’d retired two years ago I would be getting it even though I’d be on similar monies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tccp123

But heaven help them if they then come cap in hand asking for another handout!

---

Who has asked for a handout?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

Ah . . . . linka, she's notta working'a

---

Umm. Nor for me.

Regards
Paul

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Who has asked for a handout?

---

Sounds like a Ferengi Rule of Acquisition... #213 Never turn down a handout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuffy

But if they give me the money, I'll just put it into the stock market. That's probably good for future me, but does nothing for current Australia. To do the "right" thing for the Australian economy would be to buy something I wasn't already going to buy. Apart from food and utilities, what else is there to buy?

---

so, from this I can conclude that you work for the Government in an occupation deemed in the current environment "essential".

yes, or no?

If no, and I seem to recall you mentioning in the past week that you work for a truss manufacturer, what will you do when the economy tanks and no houses are being built? What will your weekly wage be in 4-6 week's time when the coronavirus unemployment peak hits? Will you be able to afford your mortgage (or rent) along with food and utilities?
People can't secure a mortgage to buy a new house when they are "temporarily unemployed" or on reduced hours and at current projections that will be about 50% of the entire workforce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

Ah . . . . linka, she's notta working'a

---

Just re loaded

Cheers Matt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

It is open to discussion as to whether the stimulus helps the poor or the not so poor more. We have to remember that the "intention" of any stimulus is both to encourage people to spend instead of becoming spendthrift recluses and to enable people without an income to live (just). The huge ethical question is "how" that money is spent and presumably it is this to which you allude.

From that excerpt you have to question whether the recipient should have been entitled to any benefit in the first place or whether they were just plain stupid in how they spent their money (ie: on something relatively extravagant). Having regard to the fact that they posted such a disgraceful admission on Facebook for all the world to see including us very judgemental Forum participants (sure as hell, if I had spent the money that way, I wouldn't be telling anybody), I would lean towards the second explanation; Unmitigated, moronic stupidity.

Regards
Paul

---

My mate has gaming and prize machines in clubs, pubs, milk bars etc and he said his takings went up 50% for two weeks after the last cash stimulus handout

Just popping out to the shops honey,
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5554543ca4.jpg

Cheers Matt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

My mate has gaming and prize machines in clubs, pubs, milk bars etc and he said his takings went up 50% for two weeks after the last cash stimulus handout

---

I don't think I'd read a whole lot into that because there are people who will always spend money on that sort of thing, but I don't think they are all that big a percentage of the population. And just because they blow it on slot machines doesn't mean the stimulus won't work in the broader community.

Nice little seething hot bed of infection going on here
DTs Maralago resort is just above where it says Miami in Florida - nice little hot spot developing

Attachment 470588

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by forrestmount

Thank you for your contribution, my memory may be wrong but I thought anyone that lodged a tax return the previous year got paid money.

---

Forrest, I think that your memory might be faulty.
My memory is that Rudd's "cash splash" was based on welfare recipients and those tax payers who lodged a tax return showing taxable earnings less than some amount.
and it didn't matter when the matter when the return was lodged -- I recall a case where a tax payer received the "splash" several years after it was legislated.


after a bit of Googling source: The RD Guide To The 2009 Australian Government Stimulus Package Handouts - Insurance Articles - Rate Detective

How much will you get [from the Rudd "cash splash"]?
Depending on what your total income from all sources was last year [2007-2008 tax return]. The payment will be:

• $900 if your taxable income is up to and including $80,000
• $600 if your taxable income is between $80,001 and $90,000, and
• $250 if your taxable income is between $90,001 and $100,000.

If you earned more than $100,000 last year you won't receive a benefit payment.