- Sep 15, 2011
- 33,044
- 51,487
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The stupidity of your analogy has been pointed out by numerous posters, so why are you persisting with it?What is done?
If the government is so concerned about the death of its people, why does it allow them to be irresponsible and eat, drink, drug themselves to death? Not only that, an unhealthy lifestyle (overweight, unfit, etc) more than likely predicts an unhappy life.
2/3 of Australians over the age of 18 are overweight or obese = epidemic. Costs the nation huge money too. The government could regulate it, the only reason it sounds foreign to you is because they've never done it. Just like people who think the economic situation isn't a problem, cause Andrews isn't saying it is.
Yet we're unable to choose whether or not we put ourselves outdoors with or without a mask on, in public to go for a walk in the fresh air. Next to zero chance of infection of a virus that literally bounces off the overwhelming majority. As I've said, the data is there, if you're susceptible to having trouble with the virus, take responsibility for yourself until there's a vaccine - wear a mask, social distance, shop early or late, don't go to your local religious institution and kiss / hug everyone. Tighten up aged care homes immensely. The data is there...
BTW, you could still give your neighbour influenza any other year, which could similarly kill him. Vaccines are often only 20% or so effective.