Independently of the truth of your statements - your comments would be better received (and, more importantly, help preserve the quality of Hacker News) if you were a little bit less...emotionally charged in your language.
Honest question: other than the phrase "It's been a disaster of a Government with disastrous policies" which is really negative, but I still consider it a valid point of view. What is emotionally charged in the language?
I feel frustration, but I do not see anything too emotional. Except that in HN you have to be a robot to post?
We might have slightly different ideas of what "emotionally charged" means, or I might have used the wrong phrase. Part of what I'm objecting to is sentences like "amusing that people get so triggered when people's objectively bad policies".
You may not consider "amusing that people get so triggered" to necessarily be "emotionally charged", but it certainly doesn't provide a lot of information or value to HN, and I think that it'll stir up other people's emotions.
Similarly, "objectively bad policies" is a very strong assertion to phrase something with a lot of political dialog around it, and like much of that other political dialogue, doesn't do a whole lot to back it up.
Memorably (to me) in Berlin they at various points banned drinking beers outdoors, implemented a 10 or 11pm (can't remember) curfew, and other absolutely pointless reactionary measures.
The guidance seemed to be randomly generated at times, and kept changing.
> The current health minister kept saying how there are no negative side effects whatsoever from the AZ vaccine until it was finally pulled off the market in Germany.
While I'm not familiar with the reasoning in Germany, in general in most countries the AZ vaccine has been discontinued (or at least largely discontinued; most places still use it for people who are allergic to an ingredient shared by the mRNA ones) because it is less effective than the mRNA ones, and believed to be _much_ less effective for Omicron.
After the policy change when Germany finally got their hands on BNT(after the US bought up all the stock), doctors actively dissuaded people with heart or other conditions from getting AZ shots.
EDIT: yes, there was talk about banning it after months of denial. And its my mistake for conflating other EU countries that care about their citizens with Germany, which clearly doesn't.
> But what's more important is that Lauterbach(the current health minister) had a plan to drastically reduce emergency beds right before Covid(I don't remember if they actually did).[1]
Lauterbach, who was not health minister at the time, is reported as saying it is likely there are too many hospitals in central locations rather than smaller clinics spread out. It's not his plan and he explicitly calls its specifics "wrong and overstated."
(And he's not wrong - in Berlin one can get amazing treatment in any specialty in our hospitals - if one could get a referral from a GP, which there aren't any of.)
Tags are extremely useful for people who want to ignore arguments based solely on who is making them. I really am not a fan of how popular they are getting.
But I don’t care about the "who", I care about their arguments. The user in question has shown with their arguments, that they are like a tabloid paper, not only do you have to take what they write with a grain of salt, it’s better to start from the assumption they are lying. It’s the same reason I use the Axel Springer (German publisher of Europe’s biggest tabloid BILD) blocklist, so visiting their sites takes an extra click.
edit: If I cared about the who, I’d remember the names.
