U.S. to close..

[Calif.Ted]

A "roundabout" in the U.S. is a death trap, nobody yields willingly, and that can be a problem when a cooperative effort is required.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by clockwork orange

Much too much is made of the advantage island nations have at controlling this when competent leadership is the real key, acting early to prevent the camels nose from getting under the tent has been a bigger factor. A prime example of an island nation with poor leadership that allowed it to get out of control would be the UK. Countries where the leadership acted effectively are now able to return to something resembling normal and their hospitals are not over run, medical personal are not burned out because they have few to no covid patients in hospital and they are in a better position should it ramp up again. Competent leadership, compliant
population who are willing to do the right thing so they can get back to some semblance of normality.

I think you are missing the point.

Being an island nation was being used as a surrogate measure of how easy it is to access that nation in normal times.

From that point of view even in the midst of Brexit, the UK is highly integrated with lots of cross border traffic with the EU. The traffic is large in number and comes via multiple routes (air/sea/tunnel).

By comparison, New Zealand is almost exclusively via air (arriving by sea takes so long as to effectively create a quarantine plus the numbers are negligible) on top of that even air travel often takes multiple days allowing the virus to manifest prior to arrival. And this is on top of drastically smaller overall volume of people crossing the border. It's simply a lot easier to control the virus at the border in NZ.

Then there was the timing factor. Once the virus is established in significant numbers, island nation status no longer has an effect because it's spreading internally more so than cross border. NZ got lucky by not having a large outbreak early on, so they could control it. UK wasn't so lucky early on.

[Mike OReilly]

As a student of politics I view leadership as one of many factors while attempting to understand or explain any given society. In most cases, leaders are a symptom, not a cause. So leaders are mostly a reflection of the current type or state of that society.

As the old adage goes: Citizens get the leader they deserve.

That's not to say leadership is unimportant. Some individual leaders are better or worse than others, much like some managers, parents, teachers, etc... . And certain styles of leadership fit better with different times or crisis vs others. But generally, rulers emerge from the morass of their communities, and are therefore a reflection of the collective state.

So individual leaders are generally less important than what the foundational state of collective being of the people. But, as with anything in human politics, there are exceptions to this.

Originally Posted by Fbfisher

Has the OP responded to the original question posed? What is the basis for the concern that marinas are going to close?

I'd say the basis of the concern is the recent past, where many marine facilities did close, or were curtailed. Combine this with the current trajectory of the pandemic and it seems a reasonable question to ask.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by aqfishing

A vaccine is only effective if a large enough portion of the population take it. Personally I know a lot of people who will not take it, some are Dr’s. No one really wants to take something that has been rushed out and not properly tested. You can’t even get people to agree to wearing a mask and now you want them all to take a vaccine....Good Luck!

Considering it will take months to make enough for the entire population, it's really not going to be an issue.

First will be high priority individuals (health care workers and highly susceptible individuals). While there may be exceptions, most of these individuals will take it (Doctors & Nurses will likely be given the choice to take it or not work at their hospital).

Later, it will be those who are not at unusual risk but chose to get it.

By the time those who are nervous get to the head of the line, the majority of the population will have already been inoculated, so if no issues arise, most of this group will get over their concern...by the time you get to hard core anti-vac, 90%+ will have it and herd immunity will have taken over and that last few percentage points won't have a big impact.

Problem with masks is they have been politicized by both sides. Sure you have people who refuse to wear a mask packed in an elevator with 30 people but you also have people who drive alone in their cars wearing masks and will happily chastise you for not doing so. Example: Last weekend we were at a National Park on a trail. It was easily 10ft wide and lightly traveled. We stayed to one side. A couple coming in the other direction fully masked up, scurried off the trail and behind a tree...then proceeded to make snarky comments. It wasn't like we were coughing in their general direction or anything and the rules didn't call for masks but they were downright nasty (we just kept walking). But these are the people who talk about "following the science" as a political jab.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Calif.Ted

A "roundabout" in the U.S. is a death trap, nobody yields willingly, and that can be a problem when a cooperative effort is required.

Having recently been driving in California...you have the opposite problem. People are yielding when they are not required to and it really throws off those who understand the simple operation.

But even so, those "death traps" have consistently been shown to drastically decrease deaths and sever injuries (Fender Benders do go up a bit).

[Tayana42]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

As a student of politics I view leadership as one of many factors while attempting to understand or explain any given society. In most cases, leaders are a symptom, not a cause. So leaders are mostly a reflection of the current type or state of that society.

As the old adage goes: Citizens get the leader they deserve.

That's not to say leadership is unimportant. Some individual leaders are better or worse than others, much like some managers, parents, teachers, etc... . And certain styles of leadership fit better with different times or crisis vs others. But generally, rulers emerge from the morass of their communities, and are therefore a reflection of the collective state.

So individual leaders are generally less important than what the foundational state of collective being of the people. But, as with anything in human politics, there are exceptions to this.



I'd say the basis of the concern is the recent past, where many marine facilities did close, or were curtailed. Combine this with the current trajectory of the pandemic and it seems a reasonable question to ask.

I believe leaders articulate a vision of a better future, a plan for how to achieve that future, in a way that a majority of people want to follow that vision and plan. With good leadership people choose to act together to accomplish what they think is needed. With bad leadership they become divided and polarized, attacking each other, accomplishing nothing.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Well, that's my point. I suggested that, because in response to someone's point that COVID-19 has been a test of leadership everywhere, and that the quality of that leadership had and has a bearing on the their subjects' compliance and frame of mind... you went off on this "what is leadership" rant. It faintly resembled some of the defensiveness we've heard from Trump's supporters when the US pandemic response is discussed.

Again, COVID-19 has been a test of leadership; some have risen to the challenge, and some have been found wanting, and the performance of each leader has very much shaped the attitude, fear level and response of their country/state/province. Do you disagree with this? It has nothing to do with individualism or leader worship.

What I agree with very much, is leadership, and its relationship to fear. For sure, real leadership (combined with social trust which Mike and others have been talking about) can considerably reduce fear and can help people make sense of what to do, and in that atmosphere you have much better chances of getting through such a crisis in an optimum way.

But note well -- demagoguery can have the same effect -- but not by helping people make sense, but by making people more sheep-like. By weaving a simplistic legend around the crisis (with the "strong leader" always in the center of the legend, of course) which tempts people to stop thinking for themselves and lulls people into accepting whatever sacrifice, whatever loss of freedom, whatever expansion of the state's power, and maybe not for noble purposes. It's not always easy to tell the difference.

And one simplistic legend which is profitable for politicians is -- we have a (relatively) good outcome; ergo, I am a strong and wise leader and all the policies were correct (without regard to the cost; and as if the outcome is solely determined by policies and not by any of the dozens of external factors) . That country had a relatively worse outcome -- therefore their policies were incorrect (or leadership was lacking, or whatever). That way the "strong leader" can sweep under the rug the costs of the action taken, and stop people from questioning anything. Never mind if he killed 10 people for every one person saved, and mortgaged his grandchildren's future, because the measures were designed to avoid political risks (avoiding anything nuanced, which might not seem "bold" enough), rather than to save people. I say again, in a crisis like this, there is a very deep conflict of interest between politicians and the people -- we should all be alert, and skeptical.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

As a student of politics I view leadership as one of many factors while attempting to understand or explain any given society. In most cases, leaders are a symptom, not a cause. So leaders are mostly a reflection of the current type or state of that society.

As the old adage goes: Citizens get the leader they deserve.

That's not to say leadership is unimportant. Some individual leaders are better or worse than others, much like some managers, parents, teachers, etc... . And certain styles of leadership fit better with different times or crisis vs others. But generally, rulers emerge from the morass of their communities, and are therefore a reflection of the collective state.

So individual leaders are generally less important than what the foundational state of collective being of the people. But, as with anything in human politics, there are exceptions to this..

Really deep, and interesting views on the subject. This is of course another layer of complication. And I think you're exactly right about all of this. What a great discussion this has turned into.

Originally Posted by Tayana42

I believe leaders articulate a vision of a better future, a plan for how to achieve that future, in a way that a majority of people want to follow that vision and plan. With good leadership people choose to act together to accomplish what they think is needed. With bad leadership they become divided and polarized, attacking each other, accomplishing nothing.

And I think you're right, too. Real leadership (as opposed to demagoguery) persuades and inspires without manipulation or supression of independent thought. And as Mike pointed out, grows out of a society that has that kind of conversation with itself anyway.

[aqfishing]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Considering it will take months to make enough for the entire population, it's really not going to be an issue.

First will be high priority individuals (health care workers and highly susceptible individuals). While there may be exceptions, most of these individuals will take it (Doctors & Nurses will likely be given the choice to take it or not work at their hospital).

Later, it will be those who are not at unusual risk but chose to get it.

By the time those who are nervous get to the head of the line, the majority of the population will have already been inoculated, so if no issues arise, most of this group will get over their concern...by the time you get to hard core anti-vac, 90%+ will have it and herd immunity will have taken over and that last few percentage points won't have a big impact.

Problem with masks is they have been politicized by both sides. Sure you have people who refuse to wear a mask packed in an elevator with 30 people but you also have people who drive alone in their cars wearing masks and will happily chastise you for not doing so. Example: Last weekend we were at a National Park on a trail. It was easily 10ft wide and lightly traveled. We stayed to one side. A couple coming in the other direction fully masked up, scurried off the trail and behind a tree...then proceeded to make snarky comments. It wasn't like we were coughing in their general direction or anything and the rules didn't call for masks but they were downright nasty (we just kept walking). But these are the people who talk about "following the science" as a political jab.

Not so sure about the 90% figure, I feel there may well be more resistance than we think. As for the dude driving alone in his car with a mask on?....I guess he also sleeps alone at night wearing a condom!

On serious note... if you have had the vaccine, does that mean you cannot transmit the virus?

[Mike OReilly]

I agree with everyone . Leaders and leadership can run on a quality scale, just like any professional. So there can be bad leaders and good leaders. But when we're talking seriously bad, as in authoritarian demagogic types, I believe these require fertile soil to take root.

This is what so concerns me when I look around the world today, and most especially at many western developed nations. Authoritarian tendencies are in the ascendance in far too many of our nations. Laying the blame on various leaders (I won't name any, but I think we could all come up with similar lists) is to miss the deeper -- and the more concerning -- point.

Healthy and strong societies laugh off the inevitable wannabe demagogues. Weak and damaged societies embrace them.

aqfishing: Your condom line gave me a good giggle. Thanks .

[aqfishing]

aqfishing: Your condom line gave me a good giggle. Thanks .

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I agree with everyone . Leaders and leadership can run on a quality scale, just like any professional. So there can be bad leaders and good leaders. But when we're talking seriously bad, as in authoritarian demagogic types, I believe these require fertile soil to take root.

This is what so concerns me when I look around the world today, and most especially at many western developed nations. Authoritarian tendencies are in the ascendance in far too many of our nations. Laying the blame on various leaders (I won't name any, but I think we could all come up with similar lists) is to miss the deeper -- and the more concerning -- point.

Healthy and strong societies laugh off the inevitable wannabe demagogues. Weak and damaged societies embrace them.

aqfishing: Your condom line gave me a good giggle. Thanks .

the citizenry of western nations have been peddled " security in leu of freedom" for a decade or more , look at Trump, brexit etc , all fear mongering

[Tayana42]

Effective leadership can be put to good or bad purposes. Think of some of the most effective leaders in history; Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr, Mahatma Gandhi, and others who have inspired people to follow their vision to the betterment of society. But other effective leaders include people like Adolf Hitler and Attila the Hun and some present day political leaders who have inspired people to do hateful things and to destroy others. So, Mike is correct that there is required a society that is willing to operate in group cooperation but also there is required a society that operates with an ethical concern for the welfare of themselves AND of others.

[Chotu]

People with masks on in their car are typically on a series of errands where it would be annoying to take it on and off or... simply forgot to take it off.

How does no one understand basic human stuff like this? Lol

[dwedeking2]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

the citizenry of western nations have been peddled " security in leu of freedom" for a decade or more , look at Trump, brexit etc , all fear mongering

I think you underestimate the timeline by a few decades but all of that groundwork is really starting to pay off... if your the one(s) at the top.