Gottiboff demands Canberra invade Melbourne

Fresh from shilling for the CCP, Gottiboff is back with more confected outrage in an attempt to bury last week’s:

The state of Victoria is in grave danger of making its third catastrophic mistake in dealing with COVID-19.

The first two mistakes have left the state in a perilous position, with widespread employment destruction and capital loss.

The bureaucrats and politicians might get lucky with their latest gamble but the odds are against them. It is becoming increasingly clear that the state and its bureaucracy simply don’t have the skills to manage a crisis of this magnitude. The task is made harder by the fact that the bureaucrats and politicians know their previous mistakes are the main reason for the Victorian crisis being worse than other states, so morale is low, compounding the dangers.

If the current set of strategies fail then the Commonwealth will need to look at all constitutional options to take control of the ailing state.

Let’s humour the old fart for a bit. What would VIC look like if Morrison had been in control so far?

It would never have locked down so would be overrun with virus. There’d be 10-20k dead.

The economy would be in tatters anyway, with much larger falls than other states. The health system would be in a catastrophic meltdown too.

Every state border would be sealed tightly shut to the VIC leper colony and manned by local militia unless Canberra invaded them too.

But the international border would be open as infected foreign kiddies poured in from all over the emerging world, repopulating the dead Victorians, and thrilling Gottiboff no end.

That is not to say that Dan Andrews has done a good job. He has not. And should resign. But Gottiboff has lost his marbles.

I’ll leave the last word to Gottiboff’s favourite, younger and saner, compatriot, Alan Kohler:

It’s true that GDP fell for two quarters, but it’s not a recession in any other sense. The government told people to stay home and a large number of businesses were forced to close. Two months later the ABS tells us that demand and output fell, of course. But that’s it: a government-mandated reduction in national output to control a virus.

That doesn’t mean I agree with my colleague Adam Creighton that they overreacted — I don’t. Research by Deloitte Access Economics published this week clearly shows that the fewer deaths a country has, the better its economy does, and vice versa.

…Government lockdowns and travel bans caused it and for an increase in activity to even begin, they have to be removed. That can only happen if the virus is under control. Victoria’s experience is salutary.

Pressure on Victoria to open up anyway, and on other states to end border restrictions, are pointlessly political and at odds with both evidence and local politics. Any state that has rising case numbers will go back into lockdown, no matter what Scott Morrison says.

Or Dad’s Army comedy acts.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. Arthur Schopenhauer

    Had the virus run amok, and slayed thousands of boomers Gotta would be having a go at Andrew. Either way, Andrew can’t win.
    It’s telling the critics never outline an alternative plan with concrete steps.

  2. How about invading Gottiboffs mindset……

    I think Andrews is 100% correct that if the COVID19 virus gets loose again then further lockdowns will ensue, therefore this lockdown needs to work.

    I think that Andrews is 100% correct that lifting the existing lockdown without transmission considerably reduced from where it is will only see a further spike in virus numbers.

    I completely agree with the sense that public commitment to the existing lockdown is starting to fray, and that reinstituting another lockdown down the track may prove to not be a goer.

    On the other hand I also tend to agree that the social and economic costs – jobs included – are both humungous and stretching people to breaking point.

    But the distinction within our community is this……

    On the one hand there is a very large percentage of people – certainly a majority – who do what they are asked, find the lockdown response plausible enough, and wear the hassle and the stress of whatever is required, and work on the idea that our elected politicians and authorities are working to both limit the possibility of the virus being communicated to the most at risk, and bearing in mind the economic consequences of this.

    On the other hand we have a small minority of people who assume that the government plan as embodied thus far is some sort attempt to do something – ranging from a plan to take over the world and assume dictatorial powers in the name of the elites through to some sort of policy to bankrupt business and throw people onto the streets or out of their houses – and who want to protest that.

    Now at the moment someone needs to start telling people of a couple of things.

    The first is that weighting the community response towards the ‘let it rip’ or ‘it’s only a batch of old people who are sick already who are dying of this virus, is fairly explicitly prioritising the focus on the economic cost of addressing a medical condition – all else needs to be considered in the context of the economic cost to our current economy. We live in an age where all else has been considered in the context of the same.  But that status quo is all about the 1% and the banking and finance world.  The moment that has a cardiac arrest – see 2008 – of course we could envisage trillion dollar responses.  But anything else – health, education, infrastructure, social welfare etc – ‘oh, that’s too expensive’ or ‘we don’t have the money’ or ‘nice to have but it’s a lower priority than (GDP in some guise).

    The line about the economic cost being too great to address COVID effectively is just another form of the same one which will come back next week or next month or next year – Lower taxes, and small government being the imperative of the day – which will be blame apportionment for health conditions.  Diabetics have caused their own problems (by eating too much and not getting enough exercise), lung cancer sufferers shouldn’t have smoked all those years, heart attack risks reflect individuals who didn’t choose a healthy lifestyle, etc etc etc – the economic cost of ‘carrying’ these people is completely out of proportion to ‘contribution’ they will make, and the ‘impact’ of the higher taxes will be XYZ – so someone will float the idea of simply telling these people ‘you are on your own’ – and we can mosey down the path of a US style health system.

    The other major point to make – to those noting economic costs and jobs in particular (here is looking at the Federal LNP and large Australian business in particular, but the whole political economy at state and federal level more generally, and almost all Australian business other than those businesses which either export, value add and sell into a global market, or provide services into a global market) is this.  Almost the entire Australian economy is a bubble.

    That bubble has been cultivated over the course of a generation by policy enacted by both sides of politics (though mainly conservative Federally) and it means that any experience outside that framework of that bubble entails considerable economic cost and imperils jobs.  That bubble means that there are very few Australians (let alone Australian businesses) which are in any way viable upon exposure to the ‘real world’ or any form of real ‘marketplace’.  Our people are amongst the most expensive on the planet, our energy costs are the most expensive on the planet, as are our educations costs and land costs.  This has been deliberate policy.

    That deliberate policy was based on the assumption that the world we knew less than a year ago – free capital movement, open borders, vast amounts of bullshido (not to mention fraud, corruption, and glib speciousness), ever falling interest rates and ever greater debt  – would go on forever, and that nothing would or could conceivably endanger the paradigm.

    Well COVID19 has, as a result, caught Australia (and numerous other nations) and Australians (along with many other nations, but few as spectacularly as Australians) with its economic pants around its ankles.

    In this context the ‘open up’ or ‘let it rip’ mindset is an investment in the economic palsy which most of us have experienced for more than a decade.  An investment in wage stagnation, in Population Ponzi, more debt, and the economic take going to the 1%, and Australia’s larger corporates harvesting the extra GDP demand made real by flooding the country with immigration to generate population growth.  And that has all those running a ‘civil rights’ line effectively arguing  (protesting, demonstrating) in the favour of the interests of the big end of town.

    Personally I think a better COVID 19 outcome would be governments of all levels identifying overtly that………

    Something like the above is what Australians have been through

    COVID19 has brought an end to that era

    A new range of economic policies will rapidly be put in place to address the above – and yes that will generate losers (particularly in the short term) but that extensive government support will mitigate that to some extent but that the priority in that mitigation will be people, and not assets.  So in this sense I would imagine that Australians with a mortgage on a lived in family home to the value of X (maybe 500-750k) will get better protection than property speculator types with ‘portfolios worth millions’ who are leveraged to the gills.  In the same way I would imagine that business relying on Australians to go ever deeper into debt, or harvesting demand of an ever increasing population base, may need to revisit their models, and that Australian businesses which are economically competitive and selling services or products into a global or open market will be afforded a more positive hearing by policymakers and politicians than they have had in a generation.

    If it requires a longer lockdown to sheet home to all economic actors that the old economic regime had a touch of the zombies about it, and that we need something new in an economic policy sense, then so be it.  Never let a crisis go to waste was the great NeoLiberal mantra.

    Now is the time to shove that deep into the great beneficiaries of that era.

    • Arthur Schopenhauer

      Gunna you must type at 1000 words a minute! 😀

      The thing that’s getting missed is 60% of new cases are staff working with Covid patients in Melbourne hospitals. This is due to a rationing of PPE.

      If there was enough PPE there would be less infection, and we’d be out of this sooner.

      Australia has no PPE manufacturing capability. And the dolts in power have no plan to create it.

    • The majority of people pushing the medical response agenda of “let it rip” and “well they didnt look after themselves so dont deserve our help’ are also probably very well aligned with the idea that they themselves are deserving of all the medical support available….

      They also seem well aligned with the idea that we should move to a system like the US but I would be happy to bet they would not survive their first medical incident in the US….. it bankrupts most people who experience critical requirements…

    • Vast majority of Swedes following all the guidelines incl social distancing etc, workers taking sick leave with very mild symptoms
      Very effective social safety net in case people are out of work etc
      Oh and better job at protecting their aged care following the large number of deaths in the first wave.
      Comparing Sweden to Australia is like comparing chalk to cheese.

    • It’s 2.3% of known cases in Australia. Unknown cases are 5 to 10 times more. In Vic’s case with good testing it’s likely 5 times.
      Limit to how many can be killed in care homes as seen with tiny rate now in Europe. Herd immunity at 25% of population.
      So 1.5% overall fatality rate allowing for care homes/5/4=.075% of population killed=4,500 in Victoria.
      That’s same rate as Sweden, and as Brazil will end up with.
      Median age in Oz and Sweden is 85.
      We don’t properly count flu numbers. It’s about 3 times as bad in terms of overall fatality, only twice as bad if adjust for fact it doesn’t affect kids.
      Not worth closing an economy over by a factor of 10 times plus.
      And takes 2 to 3 months to be nearly totally over it in a region.

      • And that’s only if you beat it with lockdown which no one outside of China in history has done when they have gotten significant community transmission.
        About .1% of the worlds hospitals ran out of PPE and that was only when they were massively Overusing ventilators.

    • Arthur Schopenhauer

      Access to PPE. See post above.

      This applies to all Australian States and NZ.

      It works like this:
      Not enough PPE -> Doctors & Nurses infected -> cannot work in Hospital for 2 weeks -> enough out of action and patient care suffers -> more people die ( Covid & non-Covid patients that need hospital care)

  3. Those 3000 Sickest and Oldest almost all have multiple children and grandchildren each, so the 3000 impacted becomes way over 150000 very easily.
    Its not just the Sickest and Oldest who are effected by it and not just through grief of the loss of a relative.
    There are many reports of multiple other issues effecting apparently healthy people.

    Even if yu could justify the assessment in these terms Its amazing that you even think this type of assessment is one the politicians could be allowed to make even if they wanted to.

    • Jdjdjjr Jcjddjdjd

      The assessment that people be treated like adults and be allowed to make their own decisions about the risks they’re willing to take to live their lives? Go forbid grandad dies, how will the children ever cope?

        • The elderly are being quietly ushered off mortal coil thanks to morphine pain med..DNR…you wouldn’t want to burden society would you? Dr Vernon Cole @ u tube speaks eloquently on this issue. World wide genocide of old people cos covid

  4. Jdjdjjr Jcjddjdjd

    I note you have resorted to controlling the narrative in comments now. Well, that’s one way to make your argument. No better than the MSM. sad to see on the once great MacroBusiness. Shame on you. Don’t worry, I don’t expect to see this comment published either.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now