Predictions of when international flights may resume/bans lifted

Pushka

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
27,028
Solutions
4
Points
3,350
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Red
We will never get anywhere with this until the vaccination becomes mandatory for most things in life. Going to work. The pub. Leaving home. Of course, no politician has the courage to make it mandatory, so I see no reason for this current purgatory to end.
They can say once people have had a reasonable time to get vaccinated that things will change. Like they do with child care. No immunisation no child care.
 

mviy

Established Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2015
Messages
3,657
Points
690
I think in a few months or so it would be reasonable to require say for instance those over 70 to have been vaccinated to go to the football. Whether or not the government will actually bring in a requirement like that is another question.
 
Your simple solution to home security. Quickly view what’s happening at home when you're not there, giving you peace of mind.

Simple plug-in installation means you’ll be up and running in no time.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
23,029
Solutions
6
Points
1,820
I don’t know. I’m really uncomfortable with mandatory vaccination. (Even though I am strongly pro vaxx myself.) It’s a tricky issue.

Agree.

On one part of AFF people are comparing Australia to a Communist dictatorship because we aren't free to leave. On another some are advocating compulsory vaccination. Which would also bring us dangerously close to a dictatorship. The government can't really win. I guess the right answer is that the freedom to choose (vaccination or not) has to outweigh the ability to travel.
 

Pushka

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
27,028
Solutions
4
Points
3,350
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Red
Agree.

On one part of AFF people are comparing Australia to a Communist dictatorship because we aren't free to leave. On another some are advocating compulsory vaccination. Which would also bring us dangerously close to a dictatorship. The government can't really win. I guess the right answer is that the freedom to choose (vaccination or not) has to outweigh the ability to travel.
But "your" freedom to choose should not have any impact on others freedom to travel.
 

jakeseven7

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
6,914
Solutions
2
Points
1,145
Agree.

On one part of AFF people are comparing Australia to a Communist dictatorship because we aren't free to leave. On another some are advocating compulsory vaccination. Which would also bring us dangerously close to a dictatorship. The government can't really win. I guess the right answer is that the freedom to choose (vaccination or not) has to outweigh the ability to travel.

What a ridiculous basic argument.

The government can/should have ‘win/won’ by getting their A into G and getting enough vaccine here to give people the choice to be vaccinated, months and months ago.
 

SydneySwan

Established Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
2,367
Points
570
Qantas
LT Silver

JB expat

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
468
Solutions
1
Points
230
Qantas
Platinum
I think in a few months or so it would be reasonable to require say for instance those over 70 to have been vaccinated to go to the football. Whether or not the government will actually bring in a requirement like that is another question.
I think in a few month or so it would be reasonable to require ANYONE eligible and without a medical-based exemption to have been vaccinated to go to the football, to the theater, to a concert, to a museum, to an exhibition, to any event with over some threshold number of people. Vaccines are the only way out - time for the big carrots & big sticks (as others have said).
 

JB expat

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
468
Solutions
1
Points
230
Qantas
Platinum
But "your" freedom to choose should not have any impact on others freedom to travel.
And choices have consequences...allowing individuals to choose but having harsh consequences in terms of limits on activities for those who opt not to vaccinate seems to be a very sane way of approaching this. Why should someone's [selfish] choice not to vaccinate mean that others have to deal with the risk of such a selfish choice - that main consequences of that selfish choice should fall on the person who made that choice. And of course, the selfish choice is even more selfish when you think about adults with medical reasons why they cannot get vaccinated and children who are a long way from being eligible to be vaccinated here in Australia. Herd immunity requires mass participation, that's based on science - a choice not based on science does not merit ANY sympathy and should indeed come with serious consequences.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
23,029
Solutions
6
Points
1,820
But "your" freedom to choose should not have any impact on others freedom to travel.

except it does... if the criteria is that the borders won't open until 'x' number of people are vaccinated.

we can't force someone to have a medical procedure against their will just so we can travel. That really would be a major regression in our democracy.
 

Pushka

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
27,028
Solutions
4
Points
3,350
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Red
except it does... if the criteria is that the borders won't open until 'x' number of people are vaccinated.

we can't force someone to have a medical procedure against their will just so we can travel. That really would be a major regression in our democracy.
We currently force medical procedures all the time, eg vaccination for children so they can attend child care and Kindergarten and for their parents to access Centrelink benefits.
 
Last edited:

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
23,029
Solutions
6
Points
1,820
We currently force medical procedures all the time, eg vaccination for children so they can attend child care and Kindergarten amd for their parents to access Centrelink benefits.

Sure... but that’s a person benefit/incentive. And a choice to forego centrelink benefits if you want. In the covid example you getting vaccinated may be no benefit to yourself, only someone else.
 

Pushka

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
27,028
Solutions
4
Points
3,350
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Red
Sure... but that’s a person benefit/incentive. And a choice to forego centrelink benefits if you want. In the covid example you getting vaccinated may be no benefit to yourself, only someone else.
So ergo, vaccinated People have the benefit/incentive of travel. And everyone benefits from being vaccinated because even young people can become very ill from it and no one knows if that person will be themselves.
 

JB expat

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
468
Solutions
1
Points
230
Qantas
Platinum
Sure... but that’s a person benefit/incentive. And a choice to forego centrelink benefits if you want. In the covid example you getting vaccinated may be no benefit to yourself, only someone else.
The COVID vaccine lowers the risk that you will be hospitalized - whether it actually does can never be determined, but it theoretically does. Primary schools also require that children be vaccinated to enroll because of the POTENTIAL exposure to a variety of serious illnesses (if you choose not to vaccinate, then homeschool) - and many people still get chicken pox despite getting the chicken pox vaccine, just a less severe form (and this is one of the childhood vaccines). Requiring the COVID vaccine to participate in certain activities seems no different to me.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
23,029
Solutions
6
Points
1,820
The COVID vaccine lowers the risk that you will be hospitalized - whether it actually does can never be determined, but it theoretically does. Primary schools also require that children be vaccinated to enroll because of the POTENTIAL exposure to a variety of serious illnesses (if you choose not to vaccinate, then homeschool) - and many people still get chicken pox despite getting the chicken pox vaccine, just a less severe form (and this is one of the childhood vaccines). Requiring the COVID vaccine to participate in certain activities seems no different to me.
I agree. But telling person A 'you must get vaccinated so person B can take a holiday' seems to be just on the other side of the line?

I'm not across immunisation requirements in other states, but Victoria for example does not require immunisation for primary school. Parents are required to provide an Immunisation History Statement, but that could be a 'zero'. (In the event of an outbreak, the statements can be used to exclude unvaccinated students until the outbreak has passed.)
 

oznflfan

Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
472
Points
215
I agree. But telling person A 'you must get vaccinated so person B can take a holiday' seems to be just on the other side of the line?

I'm not across immunisation requirements in other states, but Victoria for example does not require immunisation for primary school. Parents are required to provide an Immunisation History Statement, but that could be a 'zero'. (In the event of an outbreak, the statements can be used to exclude unvaccinated students until the outbreak has passed.)
How about you must get vaccinated so:
*Immigrant A can design the bridge you drive on to go to work.
*Immigrant A can pick the oranges you give your kids in the morning.
*Immigrant A that brings you your coffee at the cafe each monring.
*Immigrant A that brings your baby into the world.
*Immigrant A who does your tax.
*Immigrant A who reduces your power bill by building wind farms.
*Immigrant A who checks you into that hotel for your much needed destress week away in Uluru.
 

roogirl

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
119
Points
215
How about you must get vaccinated so:
*Immigrant A can design the bridge you drive on to go to work.
*Immigrant A can pick the oranges you give your kids in the morning.
*Immigrant A that brings you your coffee at the cafe each monring.
*Immigrant A that brings your baby into the world.
*Immigrant A who does your tax.
*Immigrant A who reduces your power bill by building wind farms.
*Immigrant A who checks you into that hotel for your much needed destress week away in Uluru.
Ah, but you see these are all jobs that should be done by true blue Aussies anyway. See also, foreign students. They’re only taking the places of Aussie students anyway.

Thirty years+ of poisonous toxicity against immigrants is really coming home to roost now.
 

JB expat

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
468
Solutions
1
Points
230
Qantas
Platinum
I agree. But telling person A 'you must get vaccinated so person B can take a holiday' seems to be just on the other side of the line?

I'm not across immunisation requirements in other states, but Victoria for example does not require immunisation for primary school. Parents are required to provide an Immunisation History Statement, but that could be a 'zero'. (In the event of an outbreak, the statements can be used to exclude unvaccinated students until the outbreak has passed.)
Person A is getting vaccinated for the benefit of humanity. Person A becomes much less likely to get seriously ill, becomes less likely to spread Covid and less likely to provide a vector for further mutation. It isn’t just about the borders. I think the government should pick a date for opening the borders after vaccine has been fully available for 3 months. Then person A would also be getting the vaccine to keep themselves out of the hospital.
 

serfty

Veteran Member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
43,811
Solutions
13
Points
3,300
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Platinum
I agree. But telling person A 'you must get vaccinated so person B can take a holiday' seems to be just on the other side of the line?
Nup, more like ...

Tell person A "you must get vaccinated because person B who has been vaccinated is 100 times less likely to die from the Virus should you both get infected".
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
23,029
Solutions
6
Points
1,820
Nup, more like ...

Tell person A 'you must get vaccinated because person B who has been vaccinated' is 100 times less likely to die from the Virus should you both get infected".

I agree. All the reasons to get vaccinated are valid and worthy on their own. And great incentives to get vaccinated.

But for those who still choose not to, I'm not sure the 'compulsory' line is aligned with the freedoms we expect living in a democracy?

If it was a sole choice between forced vaccinations or allowing travel it would be a tough call. But I think I'd have to go with the freedom to choose (getting vaccinated). But I would also probably leave Australia on a one way ticket!
 

Enhance your AFF viewing experience!

From just $6 we'll remove all advertisements so that you can enjoy a cleaner and uninterupted viewing experience.

And you'll be supporting us so that we can continue to provide this valuable resource :)


Sample AFF with no advertisements? More..

Currently Active Users

Top