4 ms·

> 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

by 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.
- kwhitefoot 6y ago
  > quarantine based on trust in people is eventually going to be ineffective In your country (wherever that is) perhaps, in the UK almost certainly. In Norway it is certainly possible and in fact happened quite near the beginning of the epidemic here. Nonetheless I feel that it is on the whole less of a problem here; solidarity is still a live concept in Norway even though it has been somewhat eroded in recent years. > 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. People have already been prosecuted for breaking quarantine, see for example https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/QoblPV/oslo-40000-i-bot-for-karantenebrudd https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/QoblPV/oslo-40000-i-bo..., https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/0nA4BA/fikk-20000-i-bot-for-aa-ha-festet-i-karantene https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/0nA4BA/fikk-20000-i-bo...
  - zvrba 6y ago
    > People have already been prosecuted for breaking quarantine Oh, good, that's somewhat reassuring to know.

by gspr 6y ago

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.

kwhitefoot 6y ago
> quarantine based on trust in people is eventually going to be ineffective In your country (wherever that is) perhaps, in the UK almost certainly. In Norway it is certainly possible and in fact happened quite near the beginning of the epidemic here. Nonetheless I feel that it is on the whole less of a problem here; solidarity is still a live concept in Norway even though it has been somewhat eroded in recent years. > 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. People have already been prosecuted for breaking quarantine, see for example https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/QoblPV/oslo-40000-i-bot-for-karantenebrudd https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/QoblPV/oslo-40000-i-bo..., https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/0nA4BA/fikk-20000-i-bot-for-aa-ha-festet-i-karantene https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/0nA4BA/fikk-20000-i-bo...
- zvrba 6y ago
  > People have already been prosecuted for breaking quarantine Oh, good, that's somewhat reassuring to know.