New rule: you can only say NSW should be in a harder lockdown if you can provide at least one (1) additional restriction that is supported by data that demonstrates said measure would reduce COVID transmission.
-
-
Wow, that's embarrassingly factually incorrect.
-
In which aspects?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Your disagreement does not change the facts. Pretty big hubris if you think it does.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
When you say 'in practice' and 'the difference between the lockdowns is extremely minor', do you mean the rules or their outcomes in terms of behaviour? Because if the former and not the latter, what's the cause of the latter and what's to be done about it?
-
And if the latter, what metrics are you using?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
and yet NSW numbers go up
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Payment to isolate if waiting for a test if lost work/shifts. More consistent messaging and “rules”. Modelling and a roadmap out. Huge amounts of effort to engage vulnerable communities, as well as industries to keep operating if possible with appropriate restrictions.
-
All of which are missing.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Everyone I work with who lives in Sydney agrees that Bunnings etc should be closed. It just looks mad to go browsing for things when you might take home a deadly disease as well as a new garden tool.
-
Same here, Bunnings should be tradies only, otherwise contactless click & correct. Far too many retailers open.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.