4 ms·

> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. Source: https://theconversat

> Keep in mind you are writing this in defense of a gov that presumes itself to be in charge of how many people you can have over. Source: https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to- https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-... “NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian yesterday announced freedoms for fully vaccinated people once 70% of the state’s eligible population are double dosed. These include being able to go to hospitality venues, hairdressers and gyms, and have five people to your home.” That's not the same government at all. You've quoted a decision by the NSW government, and this article is about South Australia.

throwawayfear 5y ago
My mistake. Are they not unified into a single Australian government? I'm not Australian, I'm observing from across the pond. More importantly though, that distinction does little to make it feel more right. What controls exist to keep the idiocy contained to only one part of Australia? How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen?
- FridgeSeal 5y ago
  There is a federal government, but these articles (OP and above link) are talking about the South Australian and New South Wales state governments respectively. > How do you know they won't make that the policy everywhere? Could that happen? This would require the state governments to collectively agree on something (unlikely) or for Scott Morrison (the Prime Minister) to get his act together and actually do something for once in his ineffectual life, so equally unlikely.