4 ms·

Unfortunately, it's only advisory. The government should set up a 5000 NOK (at least) "traveling fine" per person, and obligatory quarantine ("home" confinement

by zvrba 6y ago

Unfortunately, it's only advisory. The government should set up a 5000 NOK (at least) "traveling fine" per person, and obligatory quarantine ("home" confinement in state-provided guarded quarters) upon entry. THAT would discourage people from traveling. So those who MUST travel can plan ahead and know what they're up to, the rest will give up. AFAIK, insurance companies announced that they'll refuse travel-insurance claims due to corona if traveling to "red" countries. The national health institute here opines that closing the borders has questionable or no effect, even though most of the cases in the 1st wave got imported from ski-resorts in Italy. I really don't get how keeping borders open only for goods traffic won't help with reducing imported cases. Something doesn't add up.

lol139189 6y ago
Oh look, it's another authoritarian tech cunt.
arp242 6y ago
So rich people will shrug it off and travel anyway? What about the poor people who MUST travel? What if a family member is dying in another country? Just make a case-by-case judgement. Holidays are clearly stupid, but there are plenty of much more valid reasons to travel.
- devdas 6y ago
  If a family member is dying, skip the event.
  - arp242 6y ago
    What a unempathic remark. I missed the funeral of my uncle several years ago due to circumstances and the hurt was very real.
    - devdas 6y ago
      That has happened for centuries earlier. Funereals are a great way to spread disease, and losing more relatives, friends and family to disease which could have been avoided isn't a good plan. It does suck, but shit happens.
- NamTaf 6y ago
  This can all be overcome. Australia quarantines everyone coming in, with only few exceptions based on compassionate reasons and under strict controls. Hell, Aussies aren't even allowed to leave the country without approval from the government at the moment.
- zvrba 6y ago
  > So rich people will shrug it off and travel anyway? Rich people wouldn't just hand-wave away obligatory quarantine on return. It'd make them think twice whether they MUST travel.
gspr 6y ago
> Unfortunately, it's only advisory. True, but in additition to this advice, there is the Department of Foreign Affairs official travel advisory (the kind that every country issues, like "due to a civil war, we advice against all non-essential travel to country X") [1]. That advice is currently to avoid all non-essential travel to all countries, except the whitelist that is updated every two weeks. As of right now, that whitelist consists of the countries or subnational regions labeled as green on this map [2]. This is not just splitting hairs on my part: by violating the latter type of travel advisory, your health insurance is likely void, you are to expect no assistance, and you are subject to a mandatory quarantine on return, for which there is no paid sick leave. > The government should set up a 5000 NOK (at least) "traveling fine" per person, and obligatory quarantine For all the non-exempt countries, i.e. for most of the world, there is obligatory quarantine on your own dime. Unless your job allows you to work from home, that's a substantially larger financial penalty than the fine you suggest. > ("home" confinement in state-provided guarded quarters) Oh come on, this isn't China. > The national health institute here opines that closing the borders has questionable or no effect, even though most of the cases in the 1st wave got imported from ski-resorts in Italy. You seem to be aware of the whitelist of countries (even though you misrepresent the situation at the beginning of your comment). Then you are probably also aware that the idea is that the whitelisted countries have a low enough case rate that the authorities believe that closing the border to those countries has little effect. This may or may not be correct, but you seem to try to view the situation as negatively as you can. [1] https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/foreign-affairs/reiseinformasjon/travel_coronavirus/id2691821/ https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/foreign-affairs/reisein... [2] https://www.fhi.no/nettpub/coronavirus/fakta/reiserad-knyttet-til-nytt-koronavirus-coronavirus/?term=&h=1 https://www.fhi.no/nettpub/coronavirus/fakta/reiserad-knytte...
- zvrba 6y ago
  > For all the non-exempt countries, i.e. for most of the world, there is obligatory quarantine on your own dime. Unless your job allows you to work from home, that's a substantially larger financial penalty than the fine you suggest. Aaand.. quarantine based on trust in people is eventually going to be ineffective. "Traveling fine" was a minor point, the major point was forced, guarded quarantine upon entry. I mean, you can go out of a plane, go to a party next day instead of placing yourself in quarantine, infect several people, and.. nothing is going to happen to you. You could and should be prosecuted by "smittevernsparagrafen" but that most likely won't happen even if you somehow DO get identified as the source of the infection. > Oh come on, this isn't China. The way people have been partying lately around the country only proves that people can't even uphold simple rules and that a strategy based on trusting that people aren't going to behave stupidly is eventually going to fail. > Then you are probably also aware that the idea is that the whitelisted countries have a low enough case rate that the authorities believe that closing the border to those countries has little effect. The large infection cluster that has been brought to Norway this winter came from an Italian ski-resort that has been in a region that would be considered "green" today. The authorities' beliefs contradict concrete evidence. > This may or may not be correct, but you seem to try to view the situation as negatively as you can. Well... I look at people's behavior and there need to be real, tangible consequences for "unwanted" / irresponsible behavior.

by zvrba 6y ago

lol139189 6y ago

Oh look, it's another authoritarian tech cunt.

arp242 6y ago

So rich people will shrug it off and travel anyway? What about the poor people who MUST travel? What if a family member is dying in another country? Just make a case-by-case judgement. Holidays are clearly stupid, but there are plenty of much more valid reasons to travel.

devdas 6y ago
If a family member is dying, skip the event.
- arp242 6y ago
  What a unempathic remark. I missed the funeral of my uncle several years ago due to circumstances and the hurt was very real.
  - devdas 6y ago
    That has happened for centuries earlier. Funereals are a great way to spread disease, and losing more relatives, friends and family to disease which could have been avoided isn't a good plan. It does suck, but shit happens.
NamTaf 6y ago
This can all be overcome. Australia quarantines everyone coming in, with only few exceptions based on compassionate reasons and under strict controls. Hell, Aussies aren't even allowed to leave the country without approval from the government at the moment.
zvrba 6y ago
> So rich people will shrug it off and travel anyway? Rich people wouldn't just hand-wave away obligatory quarantine on return. It'd make them think twice whether they MUST travel.

gspr 6y ago

> Unfortunately, it's only advisory. True, but in additition to this advice, there is the Department of Foreign Affairs official travel advisory (the kind that every country issues, like "due to a civil war, we advice against all non-essential travel to country X") [1]. That advice is currently to avoid all non-essential travel to all countries, except the whitelist that is updated every two weeks. As of right now, that whitelist consists of the countries or subnational regions labeled as green on this map [2]. This is not just splitting hairs on my part: by violating the latter type of travel advisory, your health insurance is likely void, you are to expect no assistance, and you are subject to a mandatory quarantine on return, for which there is no paid sick leave. > The government should set up a 5000 NOK (at least) "traveling fine" per person, and obligatory quarantine For all the non-exempt countries, i.e. for most of the world, there is obligatory quarantine on your own dime. Unless your job allows you to work from home, that's a substantially larger financial penalty than the fine you suggest. > ("home" confinement in state-provided guarded quarters) Oh come on, this isn't China. > The national health institute here opines that closing the borders has questionable or no effect, even though most of the cases in the 1st wave got imported from ski-resorts in Italy. You seem to be aware of the whitelist of countries (even though you misrepresent the situation at the beginning of your comment). Then you are probably also aware that the idea is that the whitelisted countries have a low enough case rate that the authorities believe that closing the border to those countries has little effect. This may or may not be correct, but you seem to try to view the situation as negatively as you can. [1] https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/foreign-affairs/reiseinformasjon/travel_coronavirus/id2691821/ https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/foreign-affairs/reisein... [2] https://www.fhi.no/nettpub/coronavirus/fakta/reiserad-knyttet-til-nytt-koronavirus-coronavirus/?term=&h=1 https://www.fhi.no/nettpub/coronavirus/fakta/reiserad-knytte...

zvrba 6y ago
> For all the non-exempt countries, i.e. for most of the world, there is obligatory quarantine on your own dime. Unless your job allows you to work from home, that's a substantially larger financial penalty than the fine you suggest. Aaand.. quarantine based on trust in people is eventually going to be ineffective. "Traveling fine" was a minor point, the major point was forced, guarded quarantine upon entry. I mean, you can go out of a plane, go to a party next day instead of placing yourself in quarantine, infect several people, and.. nothing is going to happen to you. You could and should be prosecuted by "smittevernsparagrafen" but that most likely won't happen even if you somehow DO get identified as the source of the infection. > Oh come on, this isn't China. The way people have been partying lately around the country only proves that people can't even uphold simple rules and that a strategy based on trusting that people aren't going to behave stupidly is eventually going to fail. > Then you are probably also aware that the idea is that the whitelisted countries have a low enough case rate that the authorities believe that closing the border to those countries has little effect. The large infection cluster that has been brought to Norway this winter came from an Italian ski-resort that has been in a region that would be considered "green" today. The authorities' beliefs contradict concrete evidence. > This may or may not be correct, but you seem to try to view the situation as negatively as you can. Well... I look at people's behavior and there need to be real, tangible consequences for "unwanted" / irresponsible behavior.