Labour govt 2020-23

[BlackPeter]

China (Chengdu) for one.

Australia (Perth) for another.

Singapore for three.

Interesting.

Looking at your first example - sure, China is a country with a brutal dictatorship happily ignoring the human rights of their own population. I give you that they managed to transfer the risks of being attacked at night by strangers to the risk of being locked up and killed by the police - just for disagreeing with the party. Not sure, this is an option I would prefer.

I don't see how Australia solved the problem of a brutalised and polarized society better than NZ, so I guess you need to help me here to understand, why you think it would be better (not looking at the weather here ...).

And Singapore - this is interesting. Yes, I do know the city quite well and I do like it, too. A bit hot, but otherwise clearly a place where I could as well imagine to live - and I agree that they managed to keep peace and better control and look after their people without taking them too many rights.

I think as well that in the case of Singapore the authoritarian they used to have (Lee Kuan Yew) and the semi-democracy they currently have is probably the best which could have happened to the people. The country clearly feels safe as well as free enough. The only thing is - Singapore did work because they had a benevolent authoritarian at the top. Not many of them around, and I don't know any proven process to select a good one instead of getting one of the plenty bad.

Question is - do you think we could apply the Singaporean model in NZ, and if yes - how, without taking the risk to hand over the country to a crook?

[Logen Ninefingers]

I thought we were a 'team of 5 million' in solidarity to 'unite against COVID-19'?

Now we are told if we are given a vaccination target of say 80%, we will all collectively say "oooeeerrr.....I'll be one of the 20% then".

On what level does this make any sense at all?

We were told we were this magnificent tream of 5 million that were doing everything right to 'make gains' and collectively help each other combat the virus.
Turns out we are actually considered to be a bunch of selfish numpties who will shirk our responsibility the instant we are advised a target.

If you are a committed anti-vaxer, looks like our government thinks you'll show up and get vaccinated as long as there is no target. Is it the idea of a target that is the issue for a vaccine sceptic, or is it the vaccine itself they have an issue with?

Instead of the total bs and downright insulting reason the government has trotted out for 'no target', let's consider for one moment the real reason: they haven't yet met a single target they have set themselves, and they wouldn't be able to meet this one either! Rather than show leadership and give the nation a target to strive to meet, they abrogate responsibility for cynical political reasons.

[fungus pudding]

I thought we were a 'team of 5 million' in solidarity to 'unite against COVID-19'?

Now we are told if we are given a vaccination target of say 80%, we will all collectively say "oooeeerrr.....I'll be one of the 20% then".

On what level does this make any sense at all?

We were told we were this magnificent tream of 5 million that were doing everything right to 'make gains' and collectively help each other combat the virus.
Turns out we are actually considered to be a bunch of selfish numpties who will shirk our responsibility the instant we are advised a target.

If you are a committed anti-vaxer, looks like our government thinks you'll show up and get vaccinated as long as there is no target. Is it the idea of a target that is the issue for a vaccine sceptic, or is it the vaccine itself they have an issue with?

Instead of the total bs and downright insulting reason the government has trotted out for 'no target', let's consider for one moment the real reason: they haven't yet met a single target they have set themselves, and they wouldn't be able to meet this one either! Rather than show leadership and give the nation a target to strive to meet, they abrogate responsibility for cynical political reasons.

Yes. A target would be just another thing to miss.

[dobby41]

What do you think the target should be?
If we set, say, 90% and we got to 87% by Jan 2022 we wouldn't open? Or would we then change the target?
The target should be 100% but open earlier and not tell people what that level would be.

[fungus pudding]

What do you think the target should be?
If we set, say, 90% and we got to 87% by Jan 2022 we wouldn't open? Or would we then change the target?
The target should be 100% but open earlier and not tell people what that level would be.

Of course 100% should be the target but missing the bullseye does not need to be the end of the game.

[Blue Skies]

I thought we were a 'team of 5 million' in solidarity to 'unite against COVID-19'?

Now we are told if we are given a vaccination target of say 80%, we will all collectively say "oooeeerrr.....I'll be one of the 20% then".

On what level does this make any sense at all?

We were told we were this magnificent tream of 5 million that were doing everything right to 'make gains' and collectively help each other combat the virus.
Turns out we are actually considered to be a bunch of selfish numpties who will shirk our responsibility the instant we are advised a target.

If you are a committed anti-vaxer, looks like our government thinks you'll show up and get vaccinated as long as there is no target. Is it the idea of a target that is the issue for a vaccine sceptic, or is it the vaccine itself they have an issue with?

Instead of the total bs and downright insulting reason the government has trotted out for 'no target', let's consider for one moment the real reason: they haven't yet met a single target they have set themselves, and they wouldn't be able to meet this one either! Rather than show leadership and give the nation a target to strive to meet, they abrogate responsibility for cynical political reasons.

Be reassured, it makes perfect sense, just because you don't understand it at first glance doesn't mean its 'BS' as you put it.

Human nature being what it is, we've seen over & over the majority of the population will want to get vaccinated.
But around 60% - 65% is not high enough to effectively fight this virus.

Then there's a much smaller group who are not anti-vax but just complacent, or lazy, or scared of injections, won't get around to it.
Then a still smaller group who are anti-vax.
(Then another group who would desperately like to get vaccinated but due being immunosuppressed the vaccine won't work for).
There's also the very young who may not get vaccinated.

So if the Ministry of Health sets a target of say 80%, you can guarantee the 2nd group who are just complacent or lazy or its too difficult or they're scared of needles, will think it doesn't matter if they don't get vaccinated because they'll just be one of the 20%.

Trouble is we end up with only about 60/65% of the country vaccinated which is not enough.

We see that complacency all the time with a small group of parents who rely on other children getting vaccinated from MMR to protect their own.
They selfishly rely on others getting vaccinated to provide the herd immunity so they don't have to or can't be bothered getting their own kids vaccinated.

All this I feel ties in with the growing swing towards the rights of the individual, freedom without responsibility, the self absorption as opposed to the the sense of being a part of a community, a sense of duty, responsibility & obligations & towards others.

[dobby41]

Of course 100% should be the target but missing the bullseye does not need to be the end of the game.

How much could you miss it by and should that 'new' target be known?
If you disclose the new target then doesn't the old target become redundant?

[dobby41]

All this I feel ties in with the growing swing towards the rights of the individual, freedom without responsibility, the self absorption as opposed to the the sense of being a part of a community, a sense of duty, responsibility & obligations & towards others.

Which is interesting.
Should those who refuse to be vaccinated be given hospital treatment if they get covid?
Save the limited hospital beds for those who do the right thing.
You make your choice so bear the consequences (make your bed and lie in it).

[fungus pudding]

How much could you miss it by and should that 'new' target be known?
If you disclose the new target then doesn't the old target become redundant?

Aim for 100, call it the target. Obviously you get what you get.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Be reassured, it makes perfect sense, just because you don't understand it at first glance doesn't mean its 'BS' as you put it.

Human nature being what it is, we've seen over & over the majority of the population will want to get vaccinated.
But around 60% - 65% is not high enough to effectively fight this virus.

Then there's a much smaller group who are not anti-vax but just complacent, or lazy, or scared of injections, won't get around to it.
Then a still smaller group who are anti-vax.
(Then another group who would desperately like to get vaccinated but due being immunosuppressed the vaccine won't work for).
There's also the very young who may not get vaccinated.

So if the Ministry of Health sets a target of say 80%, you can guarantee the 2nd group who are just complacent or lazy or its too difficult or they're scared of needles, will think it doesn't matter if they don't get vaccinated because they'll just be one of the 20%.

Trouble is we end up with only about 60/65% of the country vaccinated which is not enough.

We see that complacency all the time with a small group of parents who rely on other children getting vaccinated from MMR to protect their own.
They selfishly rely on others getting vaccinated to provide the herd immunity so they don't have to or can't be bothered getting their own kids vaccinated.

All this I feel ties in with the growing swing towards the rights of the individual, freedom without responsibility, the self absorption as opposed to the the sense of being a part of a community, a sense of duty, responsibility & obligations & towards others.

So your belief is that if no target or goal is set, complacent and lazy people will go and get vaccinated? lol.

“Goals are not only absolutely necessary to motivate us. They are essential to really keep us alive.” — Robert H. Schuller

“To the person who does not know where he wants to go there is no favorable wind.” — Seneca

“The victory of success is half won when one gains the habit of setting goals and achieving them.” — Og Mandino

“Setting goals is the first step in turning the invisible into the visible.” — Tony Robbins

“Goals are the fuel in the furnace of achievement.” — Brian Tracy


“We succeed only as we identify in life, or in war, or in anything else, a single overriding objective, and make all other considerations bend to that one objective.” — Dwight D. Eisenhower, speech, April 2, 1957

“A goal properly set is halfway reached.” — Zig Ziglar