Re:In Singapore, Quarantine Comes with Sea View, Room Service
by jddj on Monday March 30, 2020 @10:14PM
(#22734350)
Sorry, you're right. The messaging was that it's primarily the travelers.
My feeling is that the quarantines definitely should have gone ahead, but in justifying them to the public the govt. seemed to place a little too much emphasis, such that people interpreted (as they do, in a crisis) most significant risk as only risk.
Re:In Singapore, Quarantine Comes with Sea View, Room Service
by nl on Monday March 30, 2020 @11:05PM
(#22734581)
I think the government had a bunch of libertarians in their ear complaining about "infringing on our freedom" to lock people in an enforced quarantine.
This sounds ridiculous, but I know someone who said "This is a nightmare! Australia has taken away all freedoms" in response to the announcement.
In that context (and I can well believe the LNP would have people like this) I think the emphasis on "the forced quarantine is limited to travellers" makes sense.
But yes, they absolutely present the biggest risk. Until March 23 (I think? Something like that) every single local transmission in Australia had been traced back to a traveller or a connection to one.
The OP said "The stats reflect the testing criteria, not the true distribution here" and my argument is that actually the stats are probably pretty accurate and given how well tracing has worked and the limits on the number of tests available the criteria was pretty reasonable.