OK, down with pessimism and sorrow! This pandemic thread is only for positive news. And do we have some:
Israel: vaccinated 21% of population, including about 70% of aged over 60 (1.9 million in total). Plans to complete vaccination by early spring.
The country has reached an agreement with Pfizer for uninterrupted vaccine supply in return for real-time vaccination statistics.
USA: achieves vaccination rate of 1.3 million doses daily
Australia (population 25.4 million): 909 deaths
Taiwan (23.8 million): cases 923 deaths 9
South Korea (51.7 million): 1,464
Right off the news (CBC): officials around a retirement home in Ontario reported to have jumped the queue in vaccine distribution. Board members, the director and the family etc were ostensibly given the "leftover vaccines" to avoid it being wasted.
Here, our humble public servants yet again in all their caring glory. If this is not the third world, and not somewhere on a remote reserve but right here in the nation's capitals, then what is?
In early December Health Canada approved the first vaccine for use in the country. As early as October national and provincial task forces were assembled and started training in vaccine distribution. Some were shown on TV under serious fanfare. What does it mean? Does it mean that now, February (months on), there is no standard procedure for effective and fair use of remainders, if any? And we have to thank our luck that board members, directors and family only by sheer chance all happened to be in the right place at the right time so that precious elixir was saved?
Iacobelli claims the leftover vaccine with a limited shelf life "would go to waste" and thus "a decision to prevent this from happening was made."
Not funny. Hardly entertaining. Simply disgusting. Looks like Lebanon, or Nicaragua. But who can say, entirely unexpected and not logical and natural evolution, of an entitled democracy?
P.S. It's hard to say this, but maybe in some ways at least we should be grateful for this experience. It revealed so much about ourselves, as we as a society really are in this mirror, not as we want to paint us to ourselves, that wouldn't be easy to find out otherwise - even if we cared to.
International and interprovincial travel has been legal in Canada outside the Maritime bubble, yet people who travel are being publicly shamed and losing their jobs. I realize there's the idea that political leaders should be held to a higher standard and that they are seen as hypocritical for asking Canadians to make sacrifices if they won't make the same efforts. I suppose, but people make choices based on all sorts of varying criteria. I'm going against the witch-hunters and saying that as long as flights are allowed, people should be able to fly without having to defend it, if they can do the necessary quarantining. It's nobody's damn business. If people have cottages or other properties, they should have the right to visit them within their own country, no questions asked.
Allowing governments to restrict movement is an issue. What if we had extreme violence or food shortages and the state prevented people from being able to flee dangerous areas or hunt for survival? I don't think government should be allowed that kind of control. Thankfully such restrictions aren't yet in place, and I don't think it's right to shame people for traveling.
Essential means different things to different people. Be careful what freedoms you give up because precedents are being set. Right now some provinces are considering curfews among many other tight restrictions on movement. I understand that much of this may be necessary, but it must be targeted and temporary. I certainly don't think it's fair to shame people for not following a restriction that hasn't become policy.
It's estimated that 20 percent of retailers will go out of business in Canada due to public health restrictions. Workers and business owners are being forced onto government subsistence handouts for the sake of preventing viral spread. Rather than letting people decide whether they want to risk shopping or patronizing businesses, government is deciding for them and destroying some livelihoods. Is it fair?
We have seen excesses at play from members and factions within the police authorities, kneeling on the neck of a subdued black man, hitting a 70 year-old white man in the face with a baton, shooting a twenty-something indigenous woman based on the police claim that she became aggressive with a knife.
These stories of police brutality arrive in the context of a pandemic that has hit poor, crowded communities hardest, many with large racialized populations. In communities that struggled to begin with, hit hard recently by Covid-19, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that police brutality against such peoples can only ignite a powder keg of pent-up anger and frustration.
Obviously no one in a protest should destroy private property or hurt innocent people. Meeting a misuse of power with a misuse of protest is an unreasonable solution to oppression.
The questions must now be asked.
What systemic policies continue to exist that enable oppression?
What must change in policing and public policy to prevent the misuse of power?
I’ll put forward a few policies that I think should immediately change:
-end all use of force against peaceful protesters
-end the criminalization and use of law enforcement against drug use (not including large scale drug dealing), prostitution (both in the provision and use of such services), drinking in public, and assembling in any sized group (including groups not practicing social distancing)
-end the harassment of people suffering from mental health problems or who are inebriated (and not harassing or hurting anyone)
-redirect funding used to enforce laws against the above mentioned behaviour towards inner city economic development and mental health programs
-end carding of people who are not committing a crime
-ensure that all police are equipped with mini cams that must be active during all forms of law enforcement
-refocus law enforcement on protecting people from violence, theft, and other clear crimes intended to hurt people
What do you think must change?
Tell a friend