Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The Daily Mail is making a different point. Right at the start of this, the government explained that the intention was to slow down the virus so as not to overwhelm the NHS. Do you really not recall that?

If you want a link to verify that was the intention, here it is, but you could have looked it up yourself rather than continually trying to discredit me.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ut-it-11962901

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

We will not avoid deaths by the measures being taken. We can only delay them.

If you think the economy isn't important in determining when the restrictions are relaxed, I don't think the majority would agree with you.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I would point out that NZ is relatively sparsely populated.

Having said that, I await the second wave. Have you looked at Japan?

As I have said consistently, you can delay, but you cannot prevent.

You can quote me on that.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

No, you don't. You just delay these deaths. As soon as the lockdown is lifted, the infection rates will increase again. They have already seen that in Germany.

---------- Post added at 16:24 ---------- Previous post was at 16:22 ----------



Accepted.

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:24 ----------


Your first sentence I do not dispute. What you are ignoring is my main point here, which is that you cannot sustain a lockdown until the end of the summer, let alone the end of the year, which is the earliest possible time that a vaccine will become available.

Last weekend was evidence that a growing number of people are ignoring the rules. It was very noticeable that there were quite a lot more cars on the road as well.