Visit our Popular Forums

goboatingnow · 09-02-2022, 14:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I do see it. But neither their being "easy to get", nor their being temporary, changes the fact that the state has taken into its hands the power to grant or deny you permission to leave your own country, something which even some pretty repressive regimes don't dare to do to their people. Seriously, that doesn't bother you?

The UK banned its citizens leaving the country, for frivolous travel , by air or by ship or the tunnel , I dont think it was an unreasonable action at the time given the situation

Governments did this to not have to handle them returning , not to prevent them leaving , if you wanted to emigrate , that was no issue

**Seaworthy Lass** · 09-02-2022, 15:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Denmark has once again declared an end to the pandemic. Or at least to pandemic measures. I guess they really mean it this time: Denmark, Overflowing With Virus Cases, Embraces a ‘Bring It On’ Attitude*https://nyti.ms/34qXePE

Sweden basically did the same on the 9th of February (today in Sweden) regarding domestic restrictions according to this government website:
https://www.krisinformation.se/en/ne...-on-9-february

“Most pandemic restrictions and general advice will be removed from 9 February. This applies to participation restrictions, vaccination certificates and requirements for distance between parties. However, some advice and recommendations will still remain.”

International restrictions are complex.
Until the 31st March there is still a ban on non-essential travel to Sweden from countries outside the EU/EEA, with some exceptions based citizenship (not residence) for some countries and country of residence (not citizenship) for others, plus exemptions based on the country that issued a COVID vaccination certificate. Oddly certificates from NZ are accepted, but not those from Australia

.

SWL

**Dockhead** · 09-02-2022, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The UK banned its citizens leaving the country, for frivolous travel , by air or by ship or the tunnel , I dont think it was an unreasonable action at the time given the situation

Governments did this to not have to handle them returning , not to prevent them leaving , if you wanted to emigrate , that was no issue

Perhaps, but it was only for a couple of months, and you didn't have to get a PERMIT from the state to leave if you had some real urgent business.

According to this:

https://www.australianfrequentflyer....izens-leaving/

"Among its peers in the Western world, Australia is unique in banning its residents from leaving the country. . . New Zealand, which has adopted a very similar strategy to Australia in dealing with COVID-19, has not banned its citizens from travelling overseas. It just strongly discourages it."

As of the time of writing last year, the ban had been in effect already for 14 months. From the point of view of civil liberties, this is extraordinary, something I've never heard of in a liberal democracy short of wartime, and generally not even then. Apprently never before such a ban even in wartime, in Oz.

As to the exit visas being easy to get, according to this: https://theconversation.com/theres-a...and-how-145089

"Most applications to leave are not successful

"Despite these exemptions, it is still difficult to get permission to leave. Only about one in three requests are being granted.
According to Border Force, between March and mid-August it received more than 104,000 requests to leave Australia. About 34,300 exemptions have been granted. . . Exemption applications are assessed by Border Force and applicants are advised to apply at least two weeks but not more than three months before departure.. . . Failing to comply with the ban is a criminal offence, punishable by up to five years’ prison, a $63,000 fine, or both."

Whether you think such extreme measures are worthwhile or not, and I suppose wise men might disagree about that, the fact is that this diverges extremely from the practice in other civilized countries, and would not be constitutionally permitted in most.

**Dockhead** · 09-02-2022, 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

. . .Until the 31st March there is still a ban on non-essential travel to Sweden from countries outside the EU/EEA, with some exceptions based citizenship (not residence) for some countries and country of residence (not citizenship) for others, plus exemptions based on the country that issued a COVID vaccination certificate. Oddly certificates from NZ are accepted, but not those from Australia .

Those are the old EU travel rules, which for some reason Sweden has held on to much longer than other EU countries. Have no idea why. The EU revised its policy in early fall already (I think), to ALLOW member states to accept vaccinated and/or tested people, and Finland has welcomed any vaccinated person from anywhere since that time.

But if you want to come to Sweden, just fly through Copenhagen or Helsinki. There are no internal border controls, and the Swedes explicitly say that non-Europeans who arrive via Finland or Denmark are welcome.

For cruising purposes note also that Sweden follows the same practice as Finland with regard to arrivals by pleasure boat. None of the travel restrictions, whatever they are, apply, if you arrive from another EU country by pleasure boat, and this was true even when the borders were otherwise closed tight. Must be some sailors in the governments of those countries!

goboatingnow · 09-02-2022, 16:13

Quote:

Whether you think such extreme measures are worthwhile or not, and I suppose wise men might disagree about that, the fact is that this diverges extremely from the practice in other civilized countries, and would not be constitutionally permitted in most.

I do agree with you here

El Pinguino · 09-02-2022, 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I do see it. But neither their being "easy to get", nor their being temporary, changes the fact that the state has taken into its hands the power to grant or deny you permission to leave your own country, something which even some pretty repressive regimes don't dare to do to their people. Seriously, that doesn't bother you?

Not unduly considering the circumstances and I wager more than a few countries had similar restrictions over the last few years. NZ? you could leave but could not expect to get back in for a very long time.

And not unexpected with our current Liberal government.

It shouldn't have been necessary. Common sense - an uncommon virtue - told me that in the pre vaxx days it would not be wise to spend over 20 hours at a New York airport so I stayed home.

Free movement is fine if you don't have quarantine.

While most tourist destinations were not letting people in anyway we would have still had a lot of dummies heading off o'seas and then squealing like stuck pigs when they found they had to wait 3 months to get home.

Exceptional times called for exceptional measures.

**Dockhead** · 09-02-2022, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

. . . "Exceptional times called for exceptional measures."

Historically, "exceptional circumstances" and "emergency situations" are one of the most common justifications for pernicious mischief by the state. Don't get too used to it. "Emergency decrees" suspending civil liberties is probably the most well-trodden road to tyranny, throughout the ages and back to the ancients. I don't want to trigger Godwin's Law by mentioning the name of a certain bad Austrian artist who rose to power on the back of a certain 1933 Emergency Decree in one up to then nice democratic country, especially since that is just one example of millions of such cases. I'm not suggesting that Oz is on the way to becoming the next Third Reich, but the best way to guaranty holding on to a civil society is to guard the constitutional order and resist the temptation to bin civil rights out of expediency or fear. It is remarkably easy to lose the attributes of a civil society, and it happens fast; most people in the Weimar Republic believed it could not possibly happen to them.

"Tyranny arises on some favorable emergency." -- James Madison

El Pinguino · 09-02-2022, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Historically, "exceptional circumstances" and "emergency situations" are one of the most common justifications for pernicious mischief by the state. Don't get too used to it. "Emergency decrees" suspending civil liberties is probably the most well-trodden road to tyranny, throughout the ages and back to the ancients. I don't want to trigger Godwin's Law by mentioning the name of a certain bad Austrian artist who rose to power on the back of a certain 1933 Emergency Decree in one up to then nice democratic country, especially since that is just one example of millions of such cases. I'm not suggesting that Oz is on the way to becoming the next Third Reich, but the best way to guaranty holding on to a civil society is to guard the constitutional order and resist the temptation to bin civil rights out of expediency or fear. It is remarkably easy to lose the attributes of a civil society, and it happens fast; most people in the Weimar Republic believed it could not possibly happen to them.

Sorry but that's a 'Godwin' right there.

Montanan · 09-02-2022, 16:57

I haven't had Covid yet, but did have an episode last week of atrial fibrillation after having eaten a one pound bag of black licorice over the course of 5 days which licorice root extract greatly reduced my potassium electrolyte levels so I needed to be electrocardio converted [shocked] at the emergency room and then sent after having been "reset back to factory specifications". My ticker is now back operating tickity boo and I have sworn off ever eating black licorice again. This incidence was one day before I was supposed to have my annual cardiology check up. I am glad to have been able to figure out why I had an episode of A Fib, third time in 30 years for which I take daily medicine to prevent. My cardiologist was not aware of the association of licorice extract inducing low potassium levels, now he will advise his patients to stay away from black licorice. The USA Food and Drug Administration had issued a health advisory back in 2017 regarding the dietary hazard. One would think that they would require a warning on the label of all products containing black licorice root extract.

My cardiologist has indicated that they expect a huge increase in patients with heart conditions due to having had Covid. The heart clinic has and will be overwhelmed.

The recent research statistics certainly indicate that is going to be the case:

Risk of new heart problems much higher after COVID recovery
Long after recovery from COVID-19, people face significantly higher risks for new heart problems.

Researchers at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs compared rates of new cardiovascular problems in 153,760 individuals infected with the coronavirus before vaccines were available, 5.6 million people who did not catch the virus, and another 5.9 million people whose data was collected before the pandemic.

An average of one year after their recovery from the acute phase of the infection, the COVID-19 survivors had a 63% higher risk for heart attack, a 69% higher risk for problematic irregular heart rhythm, a 52% higher risk of stroke, a 72% higher risk of heart failure, and a nearly three times higher risk of a potentially fatal blood clot in the lungs compared with the other two groups, according to a report published on Monday in Nature Medicine.

The elevated risks among former COVID-19 patients were evident in young and old, Blacks and whites, males and females, people with and without diabetes and with and without kidney disease, as well as smokers and nonsmokers, said Ziyad Al-Aly of the VA St. Louis Health Care System and Washington University in St. Louis. The risks were high even in people who had mild COVID-19 and did not need to be hospitalized for it, "It really spared no one," "People with COVID-19 should pay attention to their health and seek medical care if they experience symptoms like chest pain, chest pressure, palpitation, swelling in the legs, etc."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/risk-hear...195045088.html

Left wondering if the vaccines reduced the heart health risks for those that had breakthrough infections. The Veterans Administration data did not have such tracking analysis. I suppose they will likely follow up with a review of the health outcomes of those that had been vaccinated in the coming year.

**Dockhead** · 09-02-2022, 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Sorry but that's a 'Godwin' right there.

If you like. But it doesn't detract from the truth of what I say. The lesson from 1933 is irresistable.

We are living in politically unhealthy times. It's worth not being too complacent about our civilization.

goboatingnow · 09-02-2022, 17:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Historically, "exceptional circumstances" and "emergency situations" are one of the most common justifications for pernicious mischief by the state. Don't get too used to it. "Emergency decrees" suspending civil liberties is probably the most well-trodden road to tyranny, throughout the ages and back to the ancients. I don't want to trigger Godwin's Law by mentioning the name of a certain bad Austrian artist who rose to power on the back of a certain 1933 Emergency Decree in one up to then nice democratic country, especially since that is just one example of millions of such cases. I'm not suggesting that Oz is on the way to becoming the next Third Reich, but the best way to guaranty holding on to a civil society is to guard the constitutional order and resist the temptation to bin civil rights out of expediency or fear. It is remarkably easy to lose the attributes of a civil society, and it happens fast; most people in the Weimar Republic believed it could not possibly happen to them.

"Tyranny arises on some favorable emergency." -- James Madison

sure but sadly almost all states have and are still are engaging in pushing civil liberties boundaries when it suits them , The UK and the US with internment without trial ( and not in wartime per se) , Irelands constitutions contains no mention of freedom of travel ( except now one cannot be prevented from travelling to secure an abortion abroad !) This lack of freedom was used in 1938 to attempt to prevent volunteers ( 70,000) from Ireland joining the British Army, of course, it didnt work , people just walked across the NI border !!

its entirely naive to expect a piece of paper to prevent tyranny , it never has and it never will, fear can make people depart completely from reason , the US is a case in point as are many other situations ( and the Weimar Republic , which was a liberal political situation swept aside by a dictator, a situation not done against the people, but with their active support )

hence the issue is the "Gubermint" its the people themselves !

El Pinguino · 09-02-2022, 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

If you like. But it doesn't detract from the truth of what I say. The lesson from 1933 is irresistable.

We are living in politically unhealthy times. It's worth not being too complacent about our civilization.

Totally off topic but I can think of one country whose 'democracy' is infinitely more likely than Australia's to turn to custard.
Them as brought out that 'permit' legislation will be swelling the ranks of the unemployed in a few short months.

goboatingnow · 09-02-2022, 17:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

If you like. But it doesn't detract from the truth of what I say. The lesson from 1933 is irresistable.

We are living in politically unhealthy times. It's worth not being too complacent about our civilization.

Godswins law of course doesn't apply to the discussions around the Weimar republic

**Wotname** · 09-02-2022, 22:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

.......
Other than that, I've never heard of any country requiring "departure permits". I'm surprised you guys really think this is OK. You're really not attached to any of your civil liberties?

By and large we don't take ourselves too seriously and fundamentally we are a pragmatic mob and we judge things first and foremost by the 'pub test'.

Once decided there, we wait until the next election and with a pretty robust democracy (compulsory voting, full-preferential and proportional representation), dills in the parliament get the short shift and have to go looking for another job.

It ain't perfect and there have been a couple of hiccups over the past century but it works well enough; can't say the same about some other continents; maybe all other continents.

The trick is not to listen to what is said but look at what is done and as that is often SFA, we get on with doing stuff we like - sailing and wot not.