mike carey

An interesting side effect has come to light here today. Along with the welcome news that the number of new infections is falling in Australia, the Deputy Chief Medical Officer reported today the the number of seasonal influenza cases has plummeted (his word).

Well, it's obvious. You're in the desert, so dress as Priscilla. Also, see my post 582 above.

So far, not too bad. I've been posting a bit in the 'other counrties' thread in the Politics Forum. We are currently at 54 deaths (three today) and just over 6,000 cases in total. New cases have dropped below 100 per day nationally for the first time since 16 March. A significant reason for the drop is we closed the borders (except for returning Australians) on 19 March so we have almost eliminated imported cases. The imminent arrival of winter is a great concern. New Zealand had its second death today, from 1200-odd cases. Lockdown measures have been extensive, and widely accepted with some initial reluctance at being told what to do. The intensity of enforcement has varied from state to state (cities and localities have no say, regulation is at state and territory level, not lower) but essentially the message is stay at home unless what you are doing is essential. Work, shopping and exercise are deemed essential, restaurants and cafes are open only for takeaway and delivery (some are using their providores to source supplies for customers), but pubs, clubs and bars are closed, church services are closed (or streamed on line) and most small non-food retailers have closed down. Gatherings, both outside and in private homes, are limited to two people apart from household members (with fines for non-compliance). Travel is severely restricted with some states having mandatory self-quarantine for people arriving from interstate. This has been reinforced for Easter. The Northern Territory Chief Minister's advice for Easter was stay at home and eat chocolate. Unemployment payments have been doubled (it's a social security payment not insurance, it's not limited to people who were employed beforehand) and when the day after that was announced and employers knew they weren't throwing people into poverty if they laid them off and did so, long lines at claims offices led the government to rethink. Within days they announced payments of $750/week for each employee, to businesses and non-profits that had lost a significant proportion of their business. They are entitled to the payment whether they keep the employees working or stand them down, as long as they keep them on their books ready to work when this is over. The employer has to pay the worker before they receive the money through the tax office. The latest measure is making childcare and early childhood education free to parents. All of these are essentially survival payments aimed at keeping services operating and money flowing in the economy. There are gaps in the coverage but it seems to be an appropriate response, and helps make it possible for people to stay at home.

[MEDIA=twitter]1248406874057142276[/MEDIA]

More a response than a preparation, but even for a response you have to prepare. Some put more effort into it than others. [MEDIA=twitter]1248378486533681159[/MEDIA]

They are restricting the number of people who can leave (max 1,000 per day to Beijing) and imposing stringent tests before allowing people to leave. Those going home to Beijing need clearance from their local district that they can quarantine in place once they return. So, easing rather than lifting.

Ok, so posting this here is a stretch, but children travelling or even seeing their grandparents are one of the groups who are waiting for it to end. The evening current affairs program put out a call last week, or maybe the week before, for people to send in videos of children sending messages to their grandparents. They are broadcasting a collection of these videos every few days. These are the ones broadcast tonight. [MEDIA=twitter]1247826687913365505[/MEDIA]

Unfortunately, no. But I couldn't resist it.

Yes, Lady Jane Gray was never accorded the title. I don't think Phillip's title was anything more than a courtesy whereas William and Mary were joint sovereigns and he remained king when she died.

For the British monarchy, males outranked females in the line of succession, but that was changed a few years ago (it required the consent of all the 'Commonwealth Realm', 15 of them IIRC). But there are no first-born females yet who benefit from the change. If anything happened to Prince George, Princess Charlotte would be William's heir apparent over her younger brother. Mary was the daughter of James II so was in the line of succession (but not the heir) and was chosen to replace James when he fled the country and was deemed to have abdicated. They got to ignore the actual heir, because it was basically a coup, and they just could. So she had a valid-ish claim on the throne. William of Orange led an invited invasion force that was what forced James to leave, and he insisted on sharing the throne.

Yes and no. Her title would have been Queen, as were Elizabeth's mother Queen Elizabeth and grandmother Queen Mary (they were the ones for whom the ships were named). Queen consort is not a title, it's a description. When you're talking about the wife of a current king, it's obvious what her status is. But Diana would have been a queen consort, as would Camilla or Kate be next, rather than queen regnant which is what the current queen is. The only queen regnant whose husband was king was Mary, Princess of Orange. She and William III were co-sovereigns.

Q. What is the difference between COVID-19 and Romeo and Juliet? A. One is a corona virus and the other is a Verona crisis.

I found a few airline amenity kits from long haul flights that I had thrown into the bottom of a cupboard. The eye masks in them aren't ideal but they'll work for the limited times I'll be out and need one.

Consider who you use as a pretext for your exercise. [MEDIA=twitter]1246927052785307650[/MEDIA]

This sorta qualifies as maintaining mental health or at least that of any significant others with whom you might share digs. [MEDIA=twitter]1246934509204824064[/MEDIA] Ok, I intended to post the list, but the dance bit to which it replied fits into the general theme of the thread.

David. Well, actually he was christened Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David but known as David to family and friends. The last four names are those of the patron saints of the four home nations.

All of us tend to adjust our lifestyles to match a reliable income at whatever level that might be, so reinvention after a sudden change of circumstances can be difficult especially with expenses that are fixed like mortgages and fixed expenses on properties. It's never impossible, but it can be difficult.

As @BSR noted, even allowing for generalised issues with counting there is a disparity between countries on what is counted. Some, like France, are playing catchup with some groups that they have recognised they missed. Some countries, like China, appear to be deliberately obscuring the extent of the casualty rate they face. These disparities make comparison between countries problematic and a lot of the time running a league table of infection rates is not all that helpful. Despite this, the figures for individual countries are useful as long as the criteria that are used are consistent over time (or when changes to methodology are noted and trends are adjusted for them). They provide an indication of how the pandemic is progressing in each country individually, and that is important in evaluating the precautions that each is taking. It's all part of a wider understanding of statistics, that you need understand how they are derived and what they are and are not useful for. In the case of COVID-19 their greatest value is to explain trends not to make comparisons between countries.

I think it's possible to have a lot of fun with Mike with his clothes on. Whether the other party has their clothes on or not. I'm sure some bottoms could learn to do other things with appropriate encouragement!

Delighted to see you make a cheeky comment, PK.

You're quite right. Even though there isn't an approved antibody test yet, that may happen and may be a requirement. Back to the days of yellow vaccination books. I'm certainly not confident that travel from Australia will be possible this year, or that other countries or sub-national jurisdictions won't have severe restrictions. I would hope that they end up being more like the current yellow fever rules than complete travel bans, but we will see. Just now, I'm not confident in booking anything in Palm Springs before next April.

Welcome to the forum, [uSER=19448]@Joshua Mann[/uSER], or to be more precise welcome back to posting in this time of corona. As you've no doubt worked out it can be fun, but you don't need to take everything too seriously (although occasionally most of us do). No doubt it's concerning to have to freeze your RM account, but such are the times we are in.

Indeed they are not, and the situation of others is not to be minimised. But this thread is about sex workers. Many of their challenges are shared by others who are marginalised, but many others are not. Their work can't be used in a resume for other jobs, unemployment payments in the US, unlike many other countries, are contingent on having been in recognised work. Even the best prepared workers, and not just sex workers, can easily be knocked over by force majeure like a pandemic, so 'they made their choices', while correct doesn't capture the nature of the difficulty they may be in. When we're talking about one set of people on any subject, the fact that other separate groups may also be affected is a separate issue. The groups are not in competition for sympathy or anything else.

Interesting development in Australia. I rarely spend over $100 so it won't affect me (and I always use tap and go). [MEDIA=twitter]1245949000651608064[/MEDIA]