Is the fix worse than the disease?

One Australian develops diabetes every five minutes (100,000 the past year) and 500,000 people in the nation remain undiagnosed. In Italy, 36 per cent of coronavirus deaths occurred among diabetics (“Coronavirus: Public sick of journalists grandstanding in COVID-19 coverage”, 30/3) and 49 per cent of deaths had at least three prior medical conditions. The average age of death is 79.5 years and fewer than one per cent had zero prior medical conditions.

The over-60s with pre-existing conditions are the people who should be secluded and quarantined. Everyone else should be back at work (“Coronavirus: lockdown a blunt instru-ment with no guarantees”, 30/3) because after the lockdown the coronavirus will still be with us and the same at-risk cohort will still be at risk.

There are no cures for a virus — and paracetamol and oxygen are basically all that can be administered — and these do not require hospitalisation for 99 per cent of cases.

Economically, we are destroying lives. Herd immunity, derived ahead of the flu season (commencing with schoolkids and their families), is the rational response whereas lockdown, hoping for a vaccine, guarantees the “cure” will be far worse than the curse.

Greg Jones, Kogarah, NSW

On reading the Commentary pages on Monday I was left with the strong impression that many columnists and letter writers place more value on the economy than they do on human life — especially if that life is elderly. The argument seemed to be that the COVID-19 pandemic must not be resisted at the expense of the budget and the broader economy, almost as if the economy were a living thing.

In other words, this section of society, if there is such a thing, regards human lives — including, presumably, their own — as less worthy of protection than a system of tokens invented by us for our convenience (a coin is easier to carry than a cow).

I wonder if those wedded to money would be content to be regarded as dispensable in the viral battle of the economy versus the people.

Douglas Mackenzie, Deakin, ACT

The Prime Minister says his heart goes out to those Australians impacted by the coronavirus, particularly those who have lost their jobs. But does his heart go out far enough for him to make any sort of financial sacrifice and share some of the pain being felt in the community?

What about a significant cut (25 per cent) in his salary and a recommendation that all other Liberal politicians follow his example? Then again, no such offer has been made by the Leader of the Opposition.

In the Great Depression, politicians and senior public servants were prepared to cop a salary cut of 20 per cent (in 1931) without complaint.

Michael J. Gamble, Belmont Vic

Jennifer Oriel is right to call for state and local governments to present a savings plan to assist national efforts to curb the spread of COVID-19 (“No mandate for a dive into debt”, 30/3). And she’s spot on to reject Finance Minister Mathias Cormann’s offer of a pay freeze for federal politicians, when it’s a pay cut he should be talking about.

Indeed, what about the Future Fund piggy bank? It’s worth $212 billion and is made possible by taxpayers to fund the overly generous superannuation scheme for politicians and bureaucrats. As part of the savings plan, the time is right for a leader to say let’s go for one-size-fits-all by reducing public sector superannuation from 15.4 per cent to the 9.5 per cent everyone else gets. Come on, Mathias, don’t be an “economic girly man”.

Mandy Macmillan, Singleton, NSW

Given our gross national debt could be heading for a trillion dollars by the time this nightmare is over, perhaps we as a country ought to recalibrate by removing flagrant wastes of money. Some savings measures could include:
• Abolish remaining upper houses in states and territories.
• Abolish the position of governor in all states.
• Reduce the number of councillors on every council.
• Curtail all politicians’ allowances.
• Reduce the inflated salaries of senior public servants and heads of quangos.
• Place a cap on doctor visits under Medicare on a per annum basis.
• Remove the tax-free status of religious groups and unions.

No doubt there are many more areas to consider. Let’s review them all.

Sam Halvorsen, Coolum Beach, Qld