Fairly minor inconvenience, potentially big help as symptomless people don't spread it out so much. Point of mask isn't preventing you from catching.
You could be asked to wear a bright yellow mac before you go out and wash it when you get back - that is also a minor inconvenience but it doesn't mean it is effective in preventing the spread of the virus. I repeat - the scientific evidence that masks are effective at slowing or preventing spread of respiratory illnesses in a community is weak. All controlled studies have shown no or very little impact on the spread of a virus this doesn't matter whether you have it and trying to prevent spreading it on or don't have it and trying to avoid getting it because the tests consider a populace at large. The reason why this is unclear. My best postulation is that people don't use them correctly and do not continually swap them out / clean them.
Considering the inconvenience is trivial, even a minor improvement is enough to justify a mask requirement. Even a few % reduction in transmission rate is plenty to justify everyone wearing a mask when people can be going weeks as asymptomatic transmitters.
As for it not helping at all, obviously that is silly. The amount of particles masks block is >0. And even if masks did end up not helping at all, there is enough evidence to suggest they do to warrant requiring people to wear masks based on the information we have now. Simply because wearing a mask takes a trivial amount of effort.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Polls from the UK suggest otherwise, with something like 60 odd percent saying they would be afraid to go out to public places once lockdown is lifted. It's a little absurd really when you consider that for the vast majority of healthy folks, the likelihood of dying from cv is about the same as the likelihood of them dying this year anyway, that fear is irrational. I'll be happy to visit pubs and restaurants once they open up, I'll just avoid crowded places, which I generally did anyway.
Lol. It's always about me me me me with you.
Did it occur that just because you might not die your old parents could? Or that old lady you pass while you are in infecting stage without even knowing you have it as symptoms haven"t started?
Nope. Mememememememe.
Ah, nice of you to finally engage me properly for once. Unfortunately, you're mistaken.
By your logic, I shouldn't get into my car in the morning. Because I might kill someone with it. You could apply that to literally any action taken by anyone ever. There's always some element of risk.
Shield the vulnerable as best as possible, let everyone else get back to some semblance of normality.
An old lady isn't going to be infected by walking past someone outside.
I'll add this too. It might help you understand, as you really don't seem to be getting it.
This is a joke, right? Expansion of authoritarian policy? Without getting into politics, everything done by the government as a result of the coronavirus is a drop in the bucket at most compared to other actions taken in the past year. It is like saying you have a legitimate concern about an insect infestation because you found an ant trail by the front door, while the roof is collapsing because of termites. This has got to be sarcasm.
Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
But hey i have got idea. People want freedom to choose whether to follow lockdown they can. Just sign one paper and you can do whatever you wish regarding lockdown. Of course if you then are found to have been infected(mandatory tests) then as you willingly put yourself to risk and thus started new chain of infections and death you face death penalty. Your choice, your responsibility.
"muh friidom" guys get their freedom to choose to ignore lockdown, it has price to pay and as bonus point darwin gets to show it's strength as humanity is rid of large percent of selfish idiots. Win win
I suspect China's population tracking app has been a massive life saver in this. The ability to track the population and then instantly inform any on a particular pathway and location that they've been exposed and to self-isolate is basically one of the most powerful weapons for shutting down infectious spread.
Having a population that will respond swiftly to such warnings and will take them seriously is also essential for it to work.
It makes testing effective because now every positive can instantly be tracked, their route known and most of those they came into contact with at least informed to stay home and also then tested.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
But hey i have got idea. People want freedom to choose whether to follow lockdown they can. Just sign one paper and you can do whatever you wish regarding lockdown. Of course if you then are found to have been infected(mandatory tests) then as you willingly put yourself to risk and thus started new chain of infections and death you face death penalty. Your choice, your responsibility.
"muh friidom" guys get their freedom to choose to ignore lockdown, it has price to pay and as bonus point darwin gets to show it's strength as humanity is rid of large percent of selfish idiots. Win win
I’m going to save this post to use against you any time you or your fellow travellers ever start gurning about the death penalty or any other kind of corporal punishment.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
But hey i have got idea. People want freedom to choose whether to follow lockdown they can. Just sign one paper and you can do whatever you wish regarding lockdown. Of course if you then are found to have been infected(mandatory tests) then as you willingly put yourself to risk and thus started new chain of infections and death you face death penalty. Your choice, your responsibility.
"muh friidom" guys get their freedom to choose to ignore lockdown, it has price to pay and as bonus point darwin gets to show it's strength as humanity is rid of large percent of selfish idiots. Win win
I’m going to save this post to use against you any time you or your fellow travellers ever start gurning about the death penalty or any other kind of corporal punishment.
I was just going to ignore it as more of his inchoate drivel. but you realise that theres a pandemic on! any and all principles can be thrown to the wind!
Fairly minor inconvenience, potentially big help as symptomless people don't spread it out so much. Point of mask isn't preventing you from catching.
You could be asked to wear a bright yellow mac before you go out and wash it when you get back - that is also a minor inconvenience but it doesn't mean it is effective in preventing the spread of the virus. I repeat - the scientific evidence that masks are effective at slowing or preventing spread of respiratory illnesses in a community is weak. All controlled studies have shown no or very little impact on the spread of a virus this doesn't matter whether you have it and trying to prevent spreading it on or don't have it and trying to avoid getting it because the tests consider a populace at large. The reason why this is unclear. My best postulation is that people don't use them correctly and do not continually swap them out / clean them.
Considering the inconvenience is trivial, even a minor improvement is enough to justify a mask requirement. Even a few % reduction in transmission rate is plenty to justify everyone wearing a mask when people can be going weeks as asymptomatic transmitters.
As for it not helping at all, obviously that is silly. The amount of particles masks block is >0. And even if masks did end up not helping at all, there is enough evidence to suggest they do to warrant requiring people to wear masks based on the information we have now. Simply because wearing a mask takes a trivial amount of effort.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Polls from the UK suggest otherwise, with something like 60 odd percent saying they would be afraid to go out to public places once lockdown is lifted. It's a little absurd really when you consider that for the vast majority of healthy folks, the likelihood of dying from cv is about the same as the likelihood of them dying this year anyway, that fear is irrational. I'll be happy to visit pubs and restaurants once they open up, I'll just avoid crowded places, which I generally did anyway.
Lol. It's always about me me me me with you.
Did it occur that just because you might not die your old parents could? Or that old lady you pass while you are in infecting stage without even knowing you have it as symptoms haven"t started?
Nope. Mememememememe.
Ah, nice of you to finally engage me properly for once. Unfortunately, you're mistaken.
By your logic, I shouldn't get into my car in the morning. Because I might kill someone with it. You could apply that to literally any action taken by anyone ever. There's always some element of risk.
Shield the vulnerable as best as possible, let everyone else get back to some semblance of normality.
An old lady isn't going to be infected by walking past someone outside.
I'll add this too. It might help you understand, as you really don't seem to be getting it.
This is a joke, right? Expansion of authoritarian policy? Without getting into politics, everything done by the government as a result of the coronavirus is a drop in the bucket at most compared to other actions taken in the past year. It is like saying you have a legitimate concern about an insect infestation because you found an ant trail by the front door, while the roof is collapsing because of termites. This has got to be sarcasm.
And that is you, projecting your opinion, and subjective hierarchy of the importance of those issues, followed by a false equivalence to shoot down my point.
Fairly minor inconvenience, potentially big help as symptomless people don't spread it out so much. Point of mask isn't preventing you from catching.
You could be asked to wear a bright yellow mac before you go out and wash it when you get back - that is also a minor inconvenience but it doesn't mean it is effective in preventing the spread of the virus. I repeat - the scientific evidence that masks are effective at slowing or preventing spread of respiratory illnesses in a community is weak. All controlled studies have shown no or very little impact on the spread of a virus this doesn't matter whether you have it and trying to prevent spreading it on or don't have it and trying to avoid getting it because the tests consider a populace at large. The reason why this is unclear. My best postulation is that people don't use them correctly and do not continually swap them out / clean them.
Considering the inconvenience is trivial, even a minor improvement is enough to justify a mask requirement. Even a few % reduction in transmission rate is plenty to justify everyone wearing a mask when people can be going weeks as asymptomatic transmitters.
As for it not helping at all, obviously that is silly. The amount of particles masks block is >0. And even if masks did end up not helping at all, there is enough evidence to suggest they do to warrant requiring people to wear masks based on the information we have now. Simply because wearing a mask takes a trivial amount of effort.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Polls from the UK suggest otherwise, with something like 60 odd percent saying they would be afraid to go out to public places once lockdown is lifted. It's a little absurd really when you consider that for the vast majority of healthy folks, the likelihood of dying from cv is about the same as the likelihood of them dying this year anyway, that fear is irrational. I'll be happy to visit pubs and restaurants once they open up, I'll just avoid crowded places, which I generally did anyway.
Lol. It's always about me me me me with you.
Did it occur that just because you might not die your old parents could? Or that old lady you pass while you are in infecting stage without even knowing you have it as symptoms haven"t started?
Nope. Mememememememe.
Ah, nice of you to finally engage me properly for once. Unfortunately, you're mistaken.
By your logic, I shouldn't get into my car in the morning. Because I might kill someone with it. You could apply that to literally any action taken by anyone ever. There's always some element of risk.
Shield the vulnerable as best as possible, let everyone else get back to some semblance of normality.
An old lady isn't going to be infected by walking past someone outside.
I'll add this too. It might help you understand, as you really don't seem to be getting it.
This is a joke, right? Expansion of authoritarian policy? Without getting into politics, everything done by the government as a result of the coronavirus is a drop in the bucket at most compared to other actions taken in the past year. It is like saying you have a legitimate concern about an insect infestation because you found an ant trail by the front door, while the roof is collapsing because of termites. This has got to be sarcasm.
Probably be more accurate to replace that third circle with "concerned about the UN black helicopters", but that wouldn't have the same veneer of intellectual legitimacy.
ValentineGames wrote: Not my pic, but god I'm sick of seeing this gak everywhere I go as well. Filthy, disgusting, scum.
Yeah its horrendous. I went to visit my mother on Sunday, she has the virus and is dying, only a few days left as my brother was told by a doctor. When i left the hospital )Wexham PArk Hospital in Slough) I saw a lot of discarded gloves and a few masks littered the pavement/hedge area just outside the entrance
ValentineGames wrote: Not my pic, but god I'm sick of seeing this gak everywhere I go as well. Filthy, disgusting, scum.
Yeah its horrendous. I went to visit my mother on Sunday, she has the virus and is dying, only a few days left as my brother was told by a doctor. When i left the hospital )Wexham PArk Hospital in Slough) I saw a lot of discarded gloves and a few masks littered the pavement/hedge area just outside the entrance
The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
Overread wrote: The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
Yeah, given that laziness is pretty much the norm for most people, giving incentive to just dump it in the convenience of their car and taking it out later would do work in curbing a decent portion of litter, even if it won't eliminate it completely obviously.
Overread wrote: The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
Yeah, given that laziness is pretty much the norm for most people, giving incentive to just dump it in the convenience of their car and taking it out later would do work in curbing a decent portion of litter, even if it won't eliminate it completely obviously.
I always thought if governments were serious about roadside rubbish they'd have it so that the rubbish bin on the car was a container filled from a single point in the car. Then when you pull in for fuel you simply pull out the container and dump the contents in a chute at the garage. Local waste disposal can then collect from the garage. It makes emptying of the car container effortless; painless and just part of the "stop for fuel" process. A few extra moments; a small modification to cars (somewhat bigger mod to garages) and you've got something that could save the country a fortune in roadside cleanup.
Overread wrote: The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
Yeah, given that laziness is pretty much the norm for most people, giving incentive to just dump it in the convenience of their car and taking it out later would do work in curbing a decent portion of litter, even if it won't eliminate it completely obviously.
I always thought if governments were serious about roadside rubbish they'd have it so that the rubbish bin on the car was a container filled from a single point in the car. Then when you pull in for fuel you simply pull out the container and dump the contents in a chute at the garage. Local waste disposal can then collect from the garage. It makes emptying of the car container effortless; painless and just part of the "stop for fuel" process. A few extra moments; a small modification to cars (somewhat bigger mod to garages) and you've got something that could save the country a fortune in roadside cleanup.
Alas pollution and other ways to manage waste seems to be always very low on the government "to-do" list in most Western countries. They seem content to leave it to contractors and pay either lip service/the bare minimum since the current government doesn't know how long they'll stay in power, so they never think in the long-term.
Overread wrote: The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
Yeah, given that laziness is pretty much the norm for most people, giving incentive to just dump it in the convenience of their car and taking it out later would do work in curbing a decent portion of litter, even if it won't eliminate it completely obviously.
I always thought if governments were serious about roadside rubbish they'd have it so that the rubbish bin on the car was a container filled from a single point in the car. Then when you pull in for fuel you simply pull out the container and dump the contents in a chute at the garage. Local waste disposal can then collect from the garage. It makes emptying of the car container effortless; painless and just part of the "stop for fuel" process. A few extra moments; a small modification to cars (somewhat bigger mod to garages) and you've got something that could save the country a fortune in roadside cleanup.
Do fuelling stations in the UK not have garbage bins to empty car trash into?
Every store here has a bin on the way out the door and a sign stating to toss gloves and masks into.
It’s a rather simple and effective solution that requires no changes to stores or fuel stations.
Then again people need to follow that protocol. But I haven’t seen any discarded gloves or masks anywhere here though.
I have a bunch of gloves in the center console of my car. If I need to go somewhere, I put on a pair, and do whatever (get the mail or groceries). When I am done with whatever, I go to my car, put the mail or groceries in it, and shoot them onto the floor of the backseat, then close the car door without touching the handle. I repeat as needed, a fresh pair for every place I stop. I obviously wash my hands when I get back.
I only work 4 days a week (10 hour shifts), so have 3 days off. The virus only survives on rubber for 2 or 3 days, so when it's time to work again, all the gloves on the floor in the back are again are safe, and can be re-used for the next week.
This is probably unnecessary. For me the gloves are mostly useful because I wear them when handling various resins, which are skin irritants: as a result I am well trained to not touch my face when wearing them, as well as how to take them off without contaminating my skin.
Overread wrote: The problem is people are told that the outside of the glove is basically infected so they don't want to take it with them and finding a bin is likely beyond some. Then again I've long felt that the tide of rubbish along roadsides could be curbed if we simply got car designers to put a bin into a car! With ashtrays no longer included as default you don't even have a spot for sweet wrappers!
On an unrelated topic, I feel bad for messing with Orlanth over that gas mask thing a while ago ITT. I was re-reading the thread from the beginning looking for something, and a lot of what he thought might happen back in January has totally actually played out.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
But hey i have got idea. People want freedom to choose whether to follow lockdown they can. Just sign one paper and you can do whatever you wish regarding lockdown. Of course if you then are found to have been infected(mandatory tests) then as you willingly put yourself to risk and thus started new chain of infections and death you face death penalty. Your choice, your responsibility.
"muh friidom" guys get their freedom to choose to ignore lockdown, it has price to pay and as bonus point darwin gets to show it's strength as humanity is rid of large percent of selfish idiots. Win win
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
But hey i have got idea. People want freedom to choose whether to follow lockdown they can. Just sign one paper and you can do whatever you wish regarding lockdown. Of course if you then are found to have been infected(mandatory tests) then as you willingly put yourself to risk and thus started new chain of infections and death you face death penalty. Your choice, your responsibility.
"muh friidom" guys get their freedom to choose to ignore lockdown, it has price to pay and as bonus point darwin gets to show it's strength as humanity is rid of large percent of selfish idiots. Win win
Sounds very fascist.
Social darwinism*. Fascism wouldn't give you the option Same as communism.
And all Of the above are moronic.
Scrabb wrote: "Two-thirds of Bangladeshi men over the age of 60 have a long-term health condition that would put them at risk from infection."
Per the article.
I'm not going to look up the article unless someone demands it, but Kamala Harris, a US senator, is pushing for a panel here in the US to investigate the disproportionate medical outcomes in the US as well to help drive the response. As with other countries, in the US, people of color are dying at a rate much higher than white people, in some cases substantially higher (13% of the population in a state but 30% of the deaths iirc).
I'm for the investigation. It could be socio-economic factors as mentioned, but perhaps there is a racial element to the disease as well, like sickle cell anemia.
A few minutes on google or better yet on the CDC website https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/spotlight/HeartDiseaseSpotlight_2019_0404.pdf shows that preexisting medical conditions that would be comorbidities with covid19 deaths are more prevalent among African Americans. It would be more surprising if there wasn’t a racial disparity in the covid19 death rates.
Not sure what you are getting at here? We know that structural racism and discrimination leaves POC disadvantaged in health globally but the implication seems to be that it directly follows that this is an open and shut case underserving of investigation? Apologies if that isn't you're intention, but given the post that yours is presented as a rebuttal to, that's how it reads to me.
That POC are generally predisposed to ill health due to socioeconomic conditions does not mean we don't bother to investigate the specific relationships between demographics and susceptibility or vulnerability to a given disease. Even if those are known, it is still worth pursuing the specific manifestations of demographic differentials in relation to particular events. There's a lot of data there that is useful. Even in the most simple terms, that the numbers are drastically skewed even amongst affluent persons (the massive disparity between white and POC consultant fatalities in the UK, for instance) is statistically important, and very relevant to ongoing discussions re: intergenerational disadvantage even after drastic socioeconomic ladder-climbing.
Getting the stats is all well and good. But until something is done about the(already well known) root cause, any studies or inquiries feel like a distraction.
GoatboyBeta wrote: Getting the stats is all well and good. But until something is done about the(already well known) root cause, any studies or inquiries feel like a distraction.
Disagree. The root cause frequently isn't tackled because of the insistence amongst large parts of government and electorate that simple economic prosperity solves the issue. There is very stark evidence of the intergenerational longevity of disadvantage and structural barriers to health access here, and it is worth gathering whilst there is enthusiasm to do so.
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
The alternative is letting people die for the sake of economy. Let's be honest, it's not about freedom here. It's only about making money.
And there are people who are fine with that. It is a fact. As long as they're not the ones dieing.
This is why there is a struggle : we have two world views clashing in the middle of a pandemy. It's just that there are real deaths involved at our door, this time. I know people close to me infected with this sickness. So yeah, when I see people advocating they should be sacrificed for the economy, I can't help but have a really bad taste in my mouth.
ok, but can you point out anywhere in this thread that anyone has actually done that? are you incorrectly inferring it? or consciously accusing people of it to discredit their points?
tneva82 wrote: Yeah maybe masks don't help. Maybe they do. Fact is though asian countries where wearing mask is common corona cases are low. Meanwhile europe where it's uncommon is wrecked.
Minor inconvenience and no real loss to person except "muh friidom!!!" So why not.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: ok, but can you point out anywhere in this thread that anyone has actually done that? are you incorrectly inferring it? or consciously accusing people of it to discredit their points?
Never said it's on this thread.
And it is not to discredit their points. Actually, I can see why it exists - if things change and disrupt their comfortable life, it's obvious they'd become upset.
But you have to understand people's rightful fears to go back to the life "as it was" and being afraid of being infected - because it was the reason this virus spreads so quickly worldwide. Especially where the possibility of meeting people who don't care / think the virus is "not a big deal" and refuse to follow safety measures, which increase the chances of being infected that way, is far from being zero. There are points of view on this thread where it's pretty clear some people's "freedom" is way more important than keeping others safe.
You may hate the way it changes the world, but what's the alternative ? Keeping it the same way and let more people die ? And I know, some people will think "yes" in their head. Better they keep it in their thoughts, because saying it in front of people affected by this virus will make them look like monsters.
Dukeofstuff wrote: The problem is, social distancing saves time, not lives.
Actually the two are correlated. By saving time, you save lives that couldn't have been if you keep rushing things to go back to the life as it was. If social distancing wasn't there, hospitals would have been completely overwhelmed and more people would have died because they wouldn't have had the medical support that could save them.
Exactly, governments have been very forward that social distancing is about smoothing not removing the infection rate. It's about keepign the number of infections within a tolerance that health services can at least tackle without being completely overwhelmed.
It also buys time to get more equipment stocked up. You can't just order thousands of ventilators and have them appear tomorrow; it takes time. Especially when the whole world is wanting them and thus you can't even just make a rush order from overseas factories and stocks in other countries. Everyone wants the same stuff so often as not you've got to make new designs and redesign existing factories to produce a new product.
All this takes time. Furthermore the more time you buy the more scientific studies and data can be pooled and collated and produced. Meaning you might be able to increase survival rates; reduce infection periods etc..... All things that can save lives in the future by reducing the load on the system now.
Furthermore if you let it run rampant then even key workers can get affected. Lockdowns mean you can protect your key workers better - power stations, news agencies, health officials, police, armed forces etc.. Some of those roles have key workers you can't just replace on a whim. Some are critical to keeping the country functional. Imagine if you let it run wild and it got into a nuclear technician team and suddenly multiple key staff to run your power station are lost. Even if just for a few weeks suddenly you've got a potential power supply problem to all those medical facilities; whilst backup generators are only designed for short term support (and can have issues of their own when they kick in - such as knocking out long running machines or research devices )
And it is not to discredit their points. Actually, I can see why it exists - if things change and disrupt their comfortable life, it's obvious they'd become upset.
But you have to understand people's rightful fears to go back to the life "as it was" and being afraid of being infected - because it was the reason this virus spreads so quickly worldwide. Especially where the possibility of meeting people who don't care / think the virus is "not a big deal" and refuse to follow safety measures, which increase the chances of being infected that way, is far from being zero. There are points of view on this thread where it's pretty clear some people's "freedom" is way more important than keeping others safe.
You may hate the way it changes the world, but what's the alternative ? Keeping it the same way and let more people die ? And I know, some people will think "yes" in their head. Better they keep it in their thoughts, because saying it in front of people affected by this virus will make them look like monsters.
Fair enough. I can understand their fears, to a point.. But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
I understand people don't want to infect other family members who may be in more vulnerable groups, that's fair enough, but that can be mitigated by performing your own personalised social distancing to whatever degree is required in your household.
This should be possible to implement. People (for the most part) are capable of doing these complex things. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. And It's not 'freedom vs safety' as some of the more simpler minded people on here have chosen to interpret it as. The police actions, in the UK, have been appalling, especially when you consider that most of the things they have done will have no bearing on virus spread whatsoever. Seriously, go and read the emergency powers report by big brother watch. https://t.co/9p2DJrqtSd?amp=1
There was and is no need for the draconian implementation of those powers, when the majority of the country are following the guidelines, whether through common sense, or media induced fear. Rights and freedoms are important, pandemic or no. You don't just throw them away for what is at best an illusion of safety.
Dukeofstuff wrote: The problem is, social distancing saves time, not lives.
Actually the two are correlated. By saving time, you save lives that couldn't have been if you keep rushing things to go back to the life as it was. If social distancing wasn't there, hospitals would have been completely overwhelmed and more people would have died because they wouldn't have had the medical support that could save them.
I don't think anyone is saying to just be done with it and back to normal. It wouldn't happen anyway, but theres no reason we can start implementing targeted approaches which consider all the factors, risk groups, hotspots, population densities, jobs, etc etc. They could also start targeting different groups with more targeted advice, eg, those in low risk groups vs those in higher risk etc. Credit people with a little initiative and get some things rolling again.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.
Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.
For the second time in this thread, people are reading your posts, then they're choosing to disagree with what you're saying.
On another point, a lady from the WHO was just on the TV and had some interesting info which I'd not seen or expressed as explicitly before.
-Masks. Are largely pointless for most people. They have a recommendation that if you feel unwell then a mask can help prevent transmission, but they're not that useful in terms of preventing you catching it.
-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.
Reinfection news is quite welcome and its nice to see that its not just a false positive on tests, but particles of the virus once defeated being coughed up. A false positive, but from tests being reliable in terms of detecting the virus rather than from test results being erroneous.
-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.
That's potentially really good news. Hopefully former infected are also producing enough antibodies to give some resistance as well.
Latest I heard was some lab is trying to do a Frankenstein type approach.
They have sequenced coronas RNA and identified the segment that creates it's spike, the part is used to attach to a cell to begin replicating.
They've spliced just that part of the covid rna into a non harmful virus and have gotten immune system response to attack and kill it. They hope that since the spike is a prominent feature of covid the antibodies that attack a virus with it will hit covid itself.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.
Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.
Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)
Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.
And so it was, on page 122, that Godwin's law was invoked.
Queen_annes_revenge, there is a point there, that you have ignored, while implying your opponent holds Nazi views. As I recall that is called an ad hominem, attack, right?
The young and healthy aren't staying home from personal fear of death and illness- but from social consciousness. Anyone can become an asymptomatic carrier, and spend 2 weeks spreading this disease. The mortality rate is lower than initially projected, which is wonderful. However this thing spreads like wildfire- and limiting your circle of infection is the best thing for you and your community. New York's randomized testing has found that it infected https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494324-27m-new-yorkers-have-had-coronavirus-preliminary-data-shows 20% of the city- and they locked down on May 2020. 20% infection rate with a lockdown. At some point, I imagine we'll see studies showing what would have happened if social distancing wasn't implemented.
Slowing the rate of infection for humanity as a whole is the goal of social isolation. The personal safety is just a bonus.
-Masks. Are largely pointless for most people. They have a recommendation that if you feel unwell then a mask can help prevent transmission, but they're not that useful in terms of preventing you catching it.
Well duh. It's been clear long time. Point isn't to prevent wearer to catch it. Point is to prevent you spreading it. Especially those who have no symptoms(not that insignificant amount) yet are spreading. You can be spreading long time before symptoms even become visible. If they ever come. Many carry the virus and inflect long time and never even know they had it. Those are the nasty spreaders as they are walking among general public spreading it and never have even idea they had it and wont know unless they are tested(and without symptoms won't really be tested...)
-Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.
That's potentially really good news. Hopefully former infected are also producing enough antibodies to give some resistance as well.
So far here tests have revealed very few people with weak resistance having built up. Hopefully just small sample.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.
Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.
Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)
Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.
With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.
Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.
Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)
Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.
And so it was, on page 122, that Godwin's law was invoked.
Queen_annes_revenge, there is a point there, that you have ignored, while implying your opponent holds Nazi views. As I recall that is called an ad hominem, attack, right?
The young and healthy aren't staying home from personal fear of death and illness- but from social consciousness. Anyone can become an asymptomatic carrier, and spend 2 weeks spreading this disease. The mortality rate is lower than initially projected, which is wonderful. However this thing spreads like wildfire- and limiting your circle of infection is the best thing for you and your community. New York's randomized testing has found that it infected https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494324-27m-new-yorkers-have-had-coronavirus-preliminary-data-shows 20% of the city- and they locked down on May 2020. 20% infection rate with a lockdown. At some point, I imagine we'll see studies showing what would have happened if social distancing wasn't implemented.
Slowing the rate of infection for humanity as a whole is the goal of social isolation. The personal safety is just a bonus.
I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.
and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.
With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.
And now going full tilt Godwin in response
To be fair, you are one of the few who does engage properly, and usually responds in the abstract without personal attack, and it may not seem it but that is appreciated, as I can infer from your other posts that we are on different wavelengths on most issues. I'm not sure where I've been proven wrong, so far no one has been able to give me any example of how the new police powers have helped stop the spread of this virus, other than 'thers a pandemic, you want people to die, you're selfish.' I conceded you on your point about national parks being busy, but it hasn't changed my mind about going walking, or that others should do so, as its good for your health and wellbeing.
And the debate about lockdown and easing of restrictions is still ongoing in public. I believe that a targeted approach is possible, but again, all I've had so far is.. 'youre not normal because some people can be asymptomatic carriers' end debate.
Overread wrote: Reinfection news is quite welcome and its nice to see that its not just a false positive on tests, but particles of the virus once defeated being coughed up. A false positive, but from tests being reliable in terms of detecting the virus rather than from test results being erroneous.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But if a rational person, who is young, healthy, at virtually no risk (c. 0.03% adjusted IFR for that group) is too paralysed with fear to leave their house, then there is something wrong there. A nation of hypochondriacs who are afraid of their own hands is not normal.
What is not normal is that you, at this point, refuse to accept that many people aren't interested in becoming carriers and potentially killing a great deal of people who are not in that risk group.
Tneva nailed your posts ITT to a T. Memememe, indeed.
Got anything of actual substance or just more ad hominem? you know theres a word for folks who silence dissenting opinion through shutting down debate? (Clue, they were beaten in ww2)
Maybe actually read my posts.., or stay ignorant if you want., makes no odds to me. I believe those people should be allowed to do what they want (freedom right) . If they want to imprison themselves in their homes, have at it. See how that works out in the long run.
With respect, this is very disingenuous. You haven't engaged with anyone that doesn't agree with you in good faith in this thread either. You've simply found evidence that supports your a priori position, or made unfounded assertions, had them shown to be wrong, stopped responding to the poster, then made the same assertions a day or two later. I'm not sure whether this is purely rudeness, due to forgetting it's been shown to be wrong, your being so convinced you're right that you've decided your unfounded assertions and guesses hold more weight than data or reasoned argument, or just being so focussed on justifying what you personally want to do that you'll dodge all evidence to the contrary and keep restating your position hoping it finds traction, but whichever it is it's difficult to take your posts as honest interactions. Tneva is certainly consistently rude, but the 'memememememe' interpretation of your posting patterns here is an easy one to make.
And now going full tilt Godwin in response
I believe Queen is playing devil's advocate to drive discussion, rather than out of fallacious reasoning. By my measure it has worked better than one would expect.
Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted it would only be ad hominem if I made that observation then used it as a way to suggest their proposition was false.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted.
You're right, pointing out someones arguments are consistently selfish on a message board for toy soldiers is just like the holocaust.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Also, you're aware that Godwins law isnt a logical fallacy? It's completely fair to point out the comparison if its warranted.
You're right, pointing out someones arguments are consistently selfish on a message board for toy soldiers is just like the holocaust.
Incorrect inference yet again, but whatever helps you sleep at night.
Yeah, I guess your 5D chess is too much for me. Have fun with that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: -Reinfection. This was the more interesting thing I'd not heard. They now believe that the positive tests for people who'd already been confirmed as having already had Covid aren't an indicator you can become reinfected, but a consequence of the body's healing process. They believe that the second positive result has been caused by lung cells containing the virus being coughed up, which is sufficient to generate a positive result from a swab test, but doesn't actually have the potential to pass the infection on.
This is potentially the best news so far in terms of Covid, I think.
I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.
and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.
Indeed, the land of the free, so people should be able to do whatever they like.
Ever since we've had cures and prevention for diseases, we've mandated them, made them laws, and enforced them.
There's no difference from forced immunization and forced testing- heck, every year my kids were in childcare I had to produce proof of their immunizations. When I applied for my current job, I had to get vaccinated against Hepatits B. What's the difference between that and let's say a monthly Coronavirus test? So we have to carry around a license, proof of insurance, and a clean bill of health card if we want to go out of isolation?
You haven't had the right to run around without taking epidemiological precautions since the 1800s.
Social distancing needs to be held until we can track exposure through testing, if we want to avoid Coronavirus spreading all over the country. Alternatively, it needs to be kept at a level that doesn't overwhelm the medical service. There are plenty of very free countries that can track their virus spread- and have accordingly had extremely successful campaigns against the virus. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/20/understanding-what-works-how-some-countries-are-beating-back-the-coronavirus/ .
It's important to note that article is from March 20th- what works is known, and it is social distancing and virus tracking. We know what works to stop this virus spread, and let's us get back to work without killing .5% of our population. We should do that.
I'm aware of that law. I almost didnt do it, but I was getting a little tired of responding to garbage posts who's only purpose was to silence or ridicule me. and I didnt imply the holding of nazi views, only the acting in a manner of.
and thats fair enough, but the solution to asymptomatic carriers is what? there's not really anything(in a liberal society that doesnt consider things like enforced testing and immunity passports) you can do about them, apart from observing the social distancing as best as possible. thats always going to be part of the risk.
Indeed, the land of the free, so people should be able to do whatever they like.
Ever since we've had cures and prevention for diseases, we've mandated them, made them laws, and enforced them.
There's no difference from forced immunization and forced testing- heck, every year my kids were in childcare I had to produce proof of their immunizations. When I applied for my current job, I had to get vaccinated against Hepatits B. What's the difference between that and let's say a monthly Coronavirus test? So we have to carry around a license, proof of insurance, and a clean bill of health card if we want to go out of isolation?
You haven't had the right to run around without taking epidemiological precautions since the 1800s.
Social distancing needs to be held until we can track exposure through testing, if we want to avoid Coronavirus spreading all over the country. Alternatively, it needs to be kept at a level that doesn't overwhelm the medical service. There are plenty of very free countries that can track their virus spread- and have accordingly had extremely successful campaigns against the virus. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/20/understanding-what-works-how-some-countries-are-beating-back-the-coronavirus/ .
It's important to note that article is from March 20th- what works is known, and it is social distancing and virus tracking. We know what works to stop this virus spread, and let's us get back to work without killing .5% of our population. We should do that.
thats true. I support the right of businesses, childcare facilities etc to require employees or children to have vaccinations. that's just those rights working both ways. there is nothing forcing you to have them, you just dont get access to certain things without them, which is not the same thing.
That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.
I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...
I believe Queen is playing devil's advocate to drive discussion, rather than out of fallacious reasoning. By my measure it has worked better than one would expect.
Somewhat. I believe that the scientific method wasnt really followed at the start of this whole thing. the government based its strategy on a single non peer reviewed paper, based on modelling, from one epidemiologist, who has had plenty of disagreement/criticism from other members of the scientific community.
There is a recent interview on unherd. this scientist basically suggests that a virus pandemic like this one will follow the sort of trajectories that this one has, virtually regardless of precautionary actions. its this sort of thinking that influenced swedens strategy I believe.
I'm not saying I believe it, I'm not a scientist, but I believe I'm a somewhat competent thinker, and that to do so you need to have a balanced debate which considers all sides, especially when they are from valid scientific sides.
It just strikes me as odd, that given the economic predictions, that it seems that even mentioning this sort of thing in order to open up a discussion is some sort of taboo... like any dissension of opinion against the 'stay home save lives' new theocratic dogma has to be relentlessly and immediately quashed.
I do believe that the british emergency powers (barring the original proposals for allowing quarantine or testing of confirmed or suspected infected by police, and those of breaking up public gatherings out doors) are completely unnecessary and have no effect on the spread of the virus. they are just a chance for police to harass innocents, and this can be seen daily in accounts from around the country. I usually support the police, but they've got it wrong here, period. there is more than enough public support for the new guidelines. they didnt need those powers.
Ouze wrote: On an unrelated topic, I feel bad for messing with Orlanth over that gas mask thing a while ago ITT. I was re-reading the thread from the beginning looking for something, and a lot of what he thought might happen back in January has totally actually played out.
That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.
I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...
That's -- currently -- the third Russian doctor in a week to decide to/accidentally defenestrate in the middle of work -- shortly after criticizing the current administration.
I figured their health & safety was perhaps not all that but...
That's one heck of a coincidence I once heard Russia described as a gangster kleptocracy. At this point it wouldn't be surprising if Putin walks around cabinet meetings with a baseball bat.
Hang on, did you just equate the potential attempted murder of a doctor for criticising the Russian government to a woman being criticised by some idiots for not joining in with the clapping?
Hang on, did you just equate the potential attempted murder of a doctor for criticising the Russian government to a woman being criticised by some idiots for not joining in with the clapping?
ValentineGames wrote: This thread has become a massive pathetic ego tripping joke...
Its so hard to find any relevant useful posts between the waves of garbage bickering
Very true , but perhaps not the best place to look for relevant info on covid 19.
ValentineGames wrote: This thread has become a massive pathetic ego tripping joke...
Its so hard to find any relevant useful posts between the waves of garbage bickering
Very true , but perhaps not the best place to look for relevant info on covid 19.
ValentineGames wrote: This thread has become a massive pathetic ego tripping joke...
Its so hard to find any relevant useful posts between the waves of garbage bickering
Guys, please. This thread is beginning to remind me of the scene in every zombie movie where the zombies are pounding on the doors and the humans and all fighting each other.
Can we act a little smarter than the cast of morons that get eaten in every zombie movie?
Love him or hate him, Bill Maher always has something to say and often has some valid points.
Here's his thoughts on covid and the reactions to it. NSFW.
In my opinion he raised a point. Maybe a lot of people have less than optimum immune systems. Poor diet, environmental factors, whatever.
Is there something we can do about that? A real nutrient or vitamin supplement that enhances the immune system? Maybe something that can occasionally be given to people to give their immune systems a combat drill? Really, some sort of mix of benign virus and bacteria you take like say twice a year that just gives your immune system a fake invasion to fight off and keep it on it's toes? Not a specific vaccine, just a kind of fake assault to stimulate it in general, in addition to flue shots of course.
As an idea I just had, maybe we could take new or mutation prone viruses that are not dangrous yet and use safe versions of these as part of an annual general immunosystem workout to give people's immune systems exposure to these viruses in a non dangerous form so if one mutates into a kliller maybe, jut maybe, their immune systems already have a jump on it/ Again, not a doctor, I almost became a physicist but not a physician. I don't know if this is a good idea, I'm putting it out for discussion. Maybe if'd we'd been exposed to a non harmful version of this virus earlier we might have some immunity in our populace before it went killer. Maybe not, as we need updates on the flu every year. Just something to look at in the light of this epidemic, we might want to re evaluate our thoughts on preparedness and cost vs risk.
meantime, can we remember what the real enemy is? Here, just a reminder:
Hang on, did you just equate the potential attempted murder of a doctor for criticising the Russian government to a woman being criticised by some idiots for not joining in with the clapping?
It's called satire.
It can be hard to read sarcasm in text form, I would cut some slack to anyone who misinterprets. Though I will add both incidents are indeed bad, but the Russian one is actual authoritarian activity. Unfortunate, but IMO not an escalation of how Putin has run things for some time.
If you don't have something useful to add to this thread, please just don't post. Obviously, there is a lot of noise regarding COVID-19 in general, and people definitely shouldn't be getting their news on the pandemic here.
But we'd like to try to keep this thread open for discussion if possible, since it's such a huge issue and relevant to absolutely everyone. If there is a problem, please hit the mod alert button or PM any moderator, rather than responding "in kind" (or off topic) in the thread.
Thanks all...
As an additional suggestion, I'd like to ask folks to consider using the ignore function (or just not responding) if you find you've gone in circles with another poster in this thread who you just don't agree with. That way we can avoid personal back-and-forth, and focus on the larger topic we'd all like to discuss.
Responding to Matt; a huge benefit to people's health which could realistically be done is additional nutrient intake via genetically engineered crops. Genetically engineering staple foods like rice to have additional vitamins allows the improvement of people's diets without them doing anything differently (as they will still be growing the same crop they always have). This extends into another of other areas like pollution, pesticide use, and land degradation, but those are outside the scope of this thread.
Just by ensuring people have better vitamin intake we can improve overall health dramatically. Unfortunately there is a lot of pushback against GMO food, most of it baseless but some from real economic problems, which needs to be dealt with. It also runs into the classic issue with long term solutions; nutrition will not address the problems with coronavirus right now.
As for exposing people to a 'fake' enemy to keep the immune system in fighting form, that is more or less what vaccines do. In a larger picture there is an issue with over sanitation that has a negative impact on the immune systems of people in first world countries (not to mention the auto-immune conditions that arise) but that is again something that is a long-term matter.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Responding to Matt; a huge benefit to people's health which could realistically be done is additional nutrient intake via genetically engineered crops. Genetically engineering staple foods like rice to have additional vitamins allows the improvement of people's diets without them doing anything differently (as they will still be growing the same crop they always have). This extends into another of other areas like pollution, pesticide use, and land degradation, but those are outside the scope of this thread.
Just by ensuring people have better vitamin intake we can improve overall health dramatically. Unfortunately there is a lot of pushback against GMO food, most of it baseless but some from real economic problems, which needs to be dealt with. It also runs into the classic issue with long term solutions; nutrition will not address the problems with coronavirus right now.
As for exposing people to a 'fake' enemy to keep the immune system in fighting form, that is more or less what vaccines do. In a larger picture there is an issue with over sanitation that has a negative impact on the immune systems of people in first world countries (not to mention the auto-immune conditions that arise) but that is again something that is a long-term matter.
Oh yes I knew vaccines worked that way, what I'm thinking os sort of a generic mix of things that would not just key the immune system up for one thing but just give it a workout in general. Also, possibly exposing people to stuff that is not dangerous YET but could possibly mutate into a killer form.
Vaccines are like training against one specific enemy. Once in a while a good old general combat drill might help too. Maybe, I don't know.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: um? if you say so? if youre going on number of customers as an indicator of a restaurant or pubs quality, then wetherspoons and mcdonalds would be the countrys best establishments
Sorry, I wasn't clear, I was just having a little joke. Hard to convey context in text sometimes.
I don't know about santa clause, but yes, virginia, there are good people left in the world.
Nvidia's top scientist just designed an easy to build emergency ventilator to save corona victim's lives and has made the plans open source. Estimated cost in about 400 USD. He will not make a profit from this.
Make me proud to have a geforce 1660 in my battlestation.
After the UK government 'met' their 100,000 tests per day target on Thursday (by counting 40,000 test kits that they dispatched to testing centres) they've subsequently fallen to ca. 70k on Friday, 60k on Saturday, and about 50k yesterday.
nfe wrote: After the UK government 'met' their 100,000 tests per day target on Thursday (by counting 40,000 test kits that they dispatched to testing centres) they've subsequently fallen to ca. 70k on Friday, 60k on Saturday, and about 50k yesterday.
Only surprise is people are stupid enough to not make bigger noice and instead are letting them get away with that. But then again maybe that's not too much of a surprise either.
And something corona has shown. If there comes high mortality rate high infection rate pandemic humans are well and truly screwed. People won't obey lockdowns and countries will be reopening too soon because of economy concerns. Money is the king.
nfe wrote: After the UK government 'met' their 100,000 tests per day target on Thursday (by counting 40,000 test kits that they dispatched to testing centres) they've subsequently fallen to ca. 70k on Friday, 60k on Saturday, and about 50k yesterday.
honest question, are we surprised?
No.
tneva82 wrote:Only surprise is people are stupid enough to not make bigger noice and instead are letting them get away with that. But then again maybe that's not too much of a surprise either.
To be fair, those that aren't glued to news probably aren't aware. Coverage has been extremely poor.
And something corona has shown. If there comes high mortality rate high infection rate pandemic humans are well and truly screwed. People won't obey lockdowns and countries will be reopening too soon because of economy concerns. Money is the king.
I'm not sure this is true. What is more likely, is that the global north will treat any pandemic originating in the global south as unconcerning until it already has a strong foothold amongst their own populaces. If this had started in western Europe I think it would have been treated with significantly more seriousness rather than the transparent racist assumptions about east Asian cleanliness and susceptibility to illness.
I really hope that Nivdia design gets tested and proves safe and can be medically authorised and put into production - cutting costs from $20K to $400 is a massive saving and sounds like it can be made with more base materials and components and thus suitable for rapid emergancy production at non-standard factories.
And parties, sex, work, music, drugs and swings and slides. Lets not forget for the majority of the developed world this is the first pandemic in memory, whilst those who do remember them remember them from a distant time in the past. The whole of society isn't trained nor experienced in them. It's a blip in our lives.
It's also invisible; there's no sirens or warning lights; no big explosions we see and hear; no droning engines or whirring propellers and even then we had to employ whole armies of wardens to tell people to shut their lights off at night/cover them up. This is an invisible enemy that we can't see with the naked eye and which can hide for up to around a week within a person.
Money isn't king, its life as we've grown up during our most formative years that's king. It's hard to maintain social isolation within a species that's built around social connections. We aren't a species that only comes together to mate and otherwise would kill/fight each other. We come together to achieve pretty much everything humanity has achieved.
Also this disruption is scary to people on a level many don't realise. Staying boxed up, this change to life and this worry and fear is real and it is scary and people sometimes lash out at the scary and want it to go away. People try to convince themselves that the bad cough they head earlier in the year was corona; they try to say that its not around locally and its safe; that they can keep going back to their old life; that there's no worry or risk. People want their safety blanket of normal life back.
Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Ding ding ding.
The economic downturn which will culminate with the msismanagement since 2008 will give us our own personal little depression to deal with.
The only difference is, dead people tend to not be productive, which is why i personally belief a lessening of the measures as of yet is a tad to early for a lot of regions.
Otoh, don't doing this will damage the longterm events and might blow up the cardhouse some nations call a budget.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Have fun with your work when 40-50% of humanity dies.
More deadly plague than this is just matter of time. And then it will be just the same. Nobody follows guidelines and countries refusing to shut down or opening too soon.
And shows how bad companies economies are when even month income reduced/gone and companies go busto. Nobody has been preparing for this despite this being inevitable. It's not "if" but "when" something like this comes. As it is we got lucky with fairly harmless corona rather than what could have been.
So again: when(note the word. WHEN. Not if) more deadly pandemic comes humans are screwed.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Have fun with your work when 40-50% of humanity dies.
More deadly plague than this is just matter of time. And then it will be just the same. Nobody follows guidelines and countries refusing to shut down or opening too soon.
And shows how bad companies economies are when even month income reduced/gone and companies go busto. Nobody has been preparing for this despite this being inevitable. It's not "if" but "when" something like this comes. As it is we got lucky with fairly harmless corona rather than what could have been.
So again: when(note the word. WHEN. Not if) more deadly pandemic comes humans are screwed.
You lack seriously in knowledge about small scale buisness.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Blasphemy! Don't you know there's a pandemic on? Be off with your other concerns...
See that's why I haven't put tneva on ignore yet. Its like morbid curiosity wanting to see the posts... If its fairly harmless then why do the restrictions have to be so strict?
Also, if there is a world ending plague that kills off half of humanity, the economy and jobs will be of no concern because we will be in an apocalyptic mad max esque tribal world where every day is a fight for survival.
Also, I have noticed that those who are currently biting the heads off people for expressing any concern about the future of the economy also tend to be the same ones who, not too long ago, were decrying certain political decisions as being damaging to the economy. As in any damage to the economy at all as a result of these decisions was completely unacceptable.
oddly enough, I was thinking that same thing this morning, after reading some posts on twitter. However, that route could potentially just lead to a cyclic argument of appeals to hypocrisy levelled at 'the other side' so I'm loathe to go too far down it.
It all seems a bit inevitable to me. we cant stay in this state indefinitely. things are going to have the start moving, and the later its left, the worse the consequences will be. we're starting to learn much more about the virus, and this needs to be applied in an ordered, strategic policy to allow certain establishments to get rolling again. this has already started with restaurants doing take aways and such. there's no reason this sort of thing cant be worked out and adapted.
public restrictions could definitely be looked at. its been stated that casual interactions, particularly outside are not causes of the virus spread, so as long as people use common sense and keep their distance, theres absolutely no need for people to require a reason not just to leave their homes, but also remain outside them, and the boys in black to be harassing people outdoors.
work places that have no contact with the general public could get running again. I say this having worked in a hangar full of hundreds of people for the last 2 months, as normal. social distancing has been 'in place' but its really impossible to maintain during a lot of our procedures. despite this we've had 3 confirmed cases(who came back from a ski trip in austria, before the lockdown), and a handful of suspected who have self isolated then returned, and vulnerable are working from home. This has surprised me as I'd have thought we'd have more cases with the younger single guys travelling far and wide around the country every weekend.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Lockdown restrictions and rule of law to be debated today by Parliament at 5pm. Hopefully they might iron out some of the issues.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I have noticed that over the last few pages, along with a couple of others who are now on my ignore list. Cest la vie.
Yeah exactly. This is the problem. There is no desire for a balanced debate, particularly by those who proscribed to total lockdowns and authoritarian enforcement. I can only assume that's why those types just ignore it when other people say that they are taking the pandemic seriously, but also have concerns about the economy. There's no allowance for dissention against the dogma.
that is misunderstanding the issue, breaking the "dogma" in this case leads to the further spread and exemplification of the issue at hand. Regardless if you agree or disagree with the measures taken, which without a legitimate cause would be shot down out of hand btw, the measures only work if taken seriously which is incidentally why i highly disagree with the protests against lockdowns in the US off which we atleast have one case that has lead to the creation of a new hotspot over this thread. Further basic discipline can and should be expectable regardless if you are government or governed.
I think that part of the problem is that people are used to hearing about the economy as this big political abstract made up of GDP and growth rates, whilst not realising that the lives they live are made possibe by the actual reality of it. When people talk about concerns for the economy here, this is real lives that are affected, living standards reduced, fewer opportunities, and yes, lives ended. Its not life vs money as they like to make out, its life vs life (to put it crudely) there are important discussions to be had and decisions to be made, but they are shut down and the perpetrators made out to be uncaring 'sociopaths'
i do hope you differ between why people disagree with you and don't throw them under the same proverbial bus.
Vice versa, the lack of knowledge about economy is the same as the lack of understanding of the legitimacy and fundamentals of the state they are part in and can be traced to a lack of practical education.
Also then there's the fact of certain types of government extremely distancing themselves from their basis. but that is something i allready aired....
Also, I have noticed that those who are currently biting the heads off people for expressing any concern about the future of the economy also tend to be the same ones who, not too long ago, were decrying certain political decisions as being damaging to the economy. As in any damage to the economy at all as a result of these decisions was completely unacceptable.
Make of that what you will.
I note that all the people screaming about how economic matters were irrelevant compared to the will of the people , even if it meant to economic degradation , are now the ones shouting most loudly that we should all get back to work despite the vast majority of people being in favour of the lockdown continuing and that people being kept alive is quite important with regards to their liberty.
we cant stay in this state indefinitely
I don't think anyone is seriously claiming otherwise.
Sure there's plenty of posts about what the post virus/society will be but essentially that's filler or speculation.
I think people will accept that things will be different -- at least in the short term but "thankfully" -- if you follow -- people tend to have short memories and tend to revert back to what they were doing previously quite sharpish.
At least 2 schools in my way/Kent area have told parents they're not reopening now until September.
One assumes this would have to change if the Govt. tells them otherwise,
One assumes the online teaching being provided will have to stop at some point too. I know everyone jokes about the length of teaches summer holidays but it is a fairly stressful profession and I don't think teachers can be expected to keep on providing online lessons etc throughout the summer -- even given the , presumably, lessened teaching they've been giving so far in the circumstances.
I note that all the people screaming about how economic matters were irrelevant compared to the will of the people , even if it meant to economic degradation , are now the ones shouting most loudly that we should all get back to work despite the vast majority of people being in favour of the lockdown continuing and that people being kept alive is quite important with regards to their liberty.
[/i]
This is the exact circular argument of appeals to hypocrisy I mentioned in my post... I would air my opinions on this matter, reference the differences between this situation and that, but I fear it would veer too far off topic and into politics, so I will refrain.
I note that all the people screaming about how economic matters were irrelevant compared to the will of the people , even if it meant to economic degradation , are now the ones shouting most loudly that we should all get back to work despite the vast majority of people being in favour of the lockdown continuing and that people being kept alive is quite important with regards to their liberty.
[/i]
This is the exact circular argument of appeals to hypocrisy I mentioned in my post... I would air my opinions on this matter, reference the differences between this situation and that, but I fear it would veer too far off topic and into politics, so I will refrain.
Don’t fall for that trap, being baited into talking about politics by a mod...like redsn8, only to be censured for talking about politics by a mod...like redsn8. There’s a reason I have him on ignore.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Alternatively, you might have the opinion that the state needs to step in.
It's perfectly reasonable for people to fret about their ability to survive but it's problematic to conflate that arbitrarily with 'reopening the economy'. I would suggest that large business, national, and supranational concerns about and advocacy for reopening the economy hurriedly is more about saving the economic system than helping the lower middle and working classes. When people who have never experienced financial hardship have to rely on state support for a long time, a lot of people are gonna learn a lot about the viability of bootstraps. That doesn't bode well for almost anyone with the platform to push for ending lockdowns.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Alternatively, you might have the opinion that the state needs to step in.
It's perfectly reasonable for people to fret about their ability to survive but it's problematic to conflate that arbitrarily with 'reopening the economy'. I would suggest that large business, national, and supranational concerns about and advocacy for reopening the economy hurriedly is more about saving the economic system than helping the lower middle and working classes. When people who have never experienced financial hardship have to rely on state support for a long time, a lot of people are gonna learn a lot about the viability of bootstraps. That doesn't bode well for almost anyone with the platform to push for ending lockdowns.
Why are you so dismissive of the idea that people who own small businesses that have been shut down for week or people who have been forced into unemployment by the shutdown wanting to reopen shuttered businesses? There are more than just giant corporations that want economic activity. The Federal and State governments conscripted us all into the lockdown to create public safety but there wasn't anything set up to compensate people who now have no income because they're self quarantining for the greater good. Small businesses got a hard capped fund in the billions that ran out in a week requiring Congress to reconvene and pass more legislation. The first CARES Act wasn't passed until days after the lockdown so by the time the small business assistance was available many businesses had already laid people off and then any businesses that applied after the money ran out had to wait over a week for Congress to pass CARES Act 2.0 (I think they've passed 3.5 now). Shuttering your businesses and then twisting in the wind as your ability to earn a living slowly wastes away through no fault of your own is going to create a lot of anxiety in people. People who lost their jobs because of the lockdown had to file for unemployment. Now with over 30,000,000 workers on unemployment the States have to find money to pay all of those people at a time when State revenues are at historic lows from the lack of economic activity.Now states are fighting with Congress over the possibility of having to declare bankruptcy. The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment that only some (most?) of the people received and people need to cover April and May's bills. The economic hardship of the lockdown was created by government policy, the chosen response to the pandemic. Appealing to the government for aid has only gotten people told to file for unemployment or file for small business loans and wait for the indefinite lockdown to end.
Line stretches out the door at Snohomish barbershop operating outside of ‘stay-at-home’ order
...
Martin says he closed his doors for about a month when the pandemic first hit. However, he says when money got tight, he opened back up in secret.
“I wouldn’t turn the lights on. I’d come in, cut their hair and lock the door,” he said.
..
He did this he says until he heard that Snohomish County Sheriff Adam Fortney is not enforcing the “stay-at-home” order.
...
Martin says he has no plans of closing again.
“If they fine me, take away my license, or not renew it, I’m going to operate anyway. What are you going to do now? I don’t need a piece of paper to do what I’ve been doing for sixty years,” said Martin.
Also, I have noticed that those who are currently biting the heads off people for expressing any concern about the future of the economy also tend to be the same ones who, not too long ago, were decrying certain political decisions as being damaging to the economy. As in any damage to the economy at all as a result of these decisions was completely unacceptable.
Don’t fall for that trap, being baited into talking about politics by a mod...like redsn8, only to be censured for talking about politics by a mod...like redsn8. There’s a reason I have him on ignore.
et tu Brute.
via the FT
millions of companies will have to produce COVID risk assessments showing they’ve taken full precautions:
- some executives are worried this will be a major burden, especially on smaller companies
- unions think it doesn’t go far enough because assessments won’t be published
Shocked beyond belief that the Govt. and the unions won't agree !
Don't really see how the risk assessment thing is really going to help at all -- quite often very little you can do to change things here due to things like office space, opening hours etc.
Can we at least please stop the whole "it's either save the economy and accept a lot of dead people or much fewer dead people but a dead economy" nonsense?
It's a false dichotomy. If we hadn't locked down (basically) the planet, we'd have a lot more dead people, and the economy would still have tanked, probably worse than it will/is doing now.
Locking down was the right thing to do, both from a humanitarian and an economic point of view:
In the countries where the virus is retreating that are slowly opening up again (Denmark, to a lesser extent Netherlands and, yes, Italy) we'll have to see how it's going to go, what works and what doesn't. At the first sign of a re-emergence restrictions will have to be tightened again. But in all cases, the key factor is testing, testing, testing.
If you're not producing enough tests, you can't safely re-open, because you won't be able to tell if the virus is spreading again.
millions of companies will have to produce COVID risk assessments showing they’ve taken full precautions:
- some executives are worried this will be a major burden, especially on smaller companies
- unions think it doesn’t go far enough because assessments won’t be published
Shocked beyond belief that the Govt. and the unions won't agree !
Don't really see how the risk assessment thing is really going to help at all -- quite often very little you can do to change things here due to things like office space, opening hours etc.
Let the blame game begin it would seem.
Indeed. this is why the government needs to stop and allow the public and business owner to work together and take a little responsibility. you cant legislate your way out of this sort of problem.
Shocked beyond belief that the Govt. and the unions won't agree !
Don't really see how the risk assessment thing is really going to help at all -- quite often very little you can do to change things here due to things like office space, opening hours etc.
Let the blame game begin it would seem.
Blame game?
As in allready argueing this side of the spectrum is guilty no this one?
kinda pointless really considering no side can be blamed for a natural disaster
Bran Dawri wrote: Can we at least please stop the whole "it's either save the economy and accept a lot of dead people or much fewer dead people but a dead economy" nonsense?
It's a false dichotomy. If we hadn't locked down (basically) the planet, we'd have a lot more dead people, and the economy would still have tanked, probably worse than it will/is doing now.
Locking down was the right thing to do, both from a humanitarian and an economic point of view:
In the countries where the virus is retreating that are slowly opening up again (Denmark, to a lesser extent Netherlands and, yes, Italy) we'll have to see how it's going to go, what works and what doesn't. At the first sign of a re-emergence restrictions will have to be tightened again. But in all cases, the key factor is testing, testing, testing.
If you're not producing enough tests, you can't safely re-open, because you won't be able to tell if the virus is spreading again.
The ETH in Laussane expects a worse second wave somewhere in summer in the worst case scenario, e.g. social distancing not happening and people forgetting basic hygiene standards again aswell as too quick an opening.
I am cautiosuly optimistic that i't will not be as bad as expected but i wouldn't be surprised if it would happen aswell.
Not Online!!! wrote: kinda pointless really considering no side can be blamed for a natural disaster
But they can be blamed for the response and aftermath.
Which is also pointless the peoples dead and the economy in shambles regardless, the only thing you could potentially hope to achieve is getting more votes for profesional politicians and parties, which is entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand then and to be blunt it happens regardless and is just a nice little distraction from the failure that many governments made regardless of party since 2008 ..
Of course the excessess in both ways will be and should be judged, but i fail to see what the blame game brings to the table when you actually can have the responsible organisations work together. If there is a time for productive and cooperative behaviour then it is this.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Alternatively, you might have the opinion that the state needs to step in.
It's perfectly reasonable for people to fret about their ability to survive but it's problematic to conflate that arbitrarily with 'reopening the economy'. I would suggest that large business, national, and supranational concerns about and advocacy for reopening the economy hurriedly is more about saving the economic system than helping the lower middle and working classes. When people who have never experienced financial hardship have to rely on state support for a long time, a lot of people are gonna learn a lot about the viability of bootstraps. That doesn't bode well for almost anyone with the platform to push for ending lockdowns.
The state cant provide for everyone for an indefinite period though, that has been proven. Plus, people want to provide for themselves and their families. they dont want to be dependant on the state, they want that dignity. its not just about big corporations, (although people do benefit from trickle down of those companies.) I know you will disagree because of your world view, but not everything is big business greed and the little man needing government aid.
cuda1179 wrote: Well, it's back to work Monday for me. (technically Saturday).
Restaurants are now able to be opened, but we have 2 days of food prep to do.
In addition to wearing gloves and face masks we need to stand at least 6 feet apart. We are also legally limited to 50% capacity, and all tables must be at least 6 feet apart. So, realistically this means we are at 45% table capacity. Also, no tables of more than 6 people.
I'm totally thrown. Mothers day is coming up fast. It's usually our busiest day of the year, by a far margin. Every year the store is PACKED. I have no idea what will happen now. I somehow expect groups of people waiting outside the door for a table to free up.
I hate dealing with people on "normal" days that demand "their table NOW". Also, I know I'm going to have to stop people from trying to pull 2 tables together.
I am probably way too late, but "Good Luck"
I once was forced to make a similar decision to stay open or try to run things at half capacity. I tried to run things at half capacity as some money was better than no money. It was one of the worst decisions I made as a small business owner. I lost way more than I gained and we never really recovered to the sales we were making pre-restricted opening. Mine was a closure due to building issues rather than a virus, but still out of my control.
Why did I end up loosing business?
1. Staff had a difficult time adjusting to new routines, so service speed and efficiency suffered
2. Customer expectations were then not met, and they got mad
3. These Customers hated change, and took it out on all of us
4. Poor staffing and Purchasing due to inaccurate forecasting of the new reality
I barely made any money, and lost more in the long run than just staying closed and collecting the insurance as long as I could.
I hope you have happier results! I am so glad to be out of this particular game.....
Line stretches out the door at Snohomish barbershop operating outside of ‘stay-at-home’ order
...
Martin says he closed his doors for about a month when the pandemic first hit. However, he says when money got tight, he opened back up in secret.
“I wouldn’t turn the lights on. I’d come in, cut their hair and lock the door,” he said.
..
He did this he says until he heard that Snohomish County Sheriff Adam Fortney is not enforcing the “stay-at-home” order.
...
Martin says he has no plans of closing again.
“If they fine me, take away my license, or not renew it, I’m going to operate anyway. What are you going to do now? I don’t need a piece of paper to do what I’ve been doing for sixty years,” said Martin.
Yup. I'd be willing to bet money on lots of small businesses and self employed sending out discreet whatsapp messages and the like to their closest customers allowing them to keep their business running.
At my big company that I work at (not the small ones I used to own) we are allowed back in the office next week, but we can not have meetings, must wear a mask (even in our personal work spaces and offices), have twice daily cleaning routines, and can not interact.
Therefore, no point going in as WFH is just as effective for most of us. Now, Distribution centers works it is not so easy to avoid.....
It’s really hitting home now. Whilst my dad’s friends dad is on the mend (although he’ll be recovering for months and might never fully be himself again) my friend is awaiting the call to tell him that his mother has died from it.
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Alternatively, you might have the opinion that the state needs to step in.
It's perfectly reasonable for people to fret about their ability to survive but it's problematic to conflate that arbitrarily with 'reopening the economy'. I would suggest that large business, national, and supranational concerns about and advocacy for reopening the economy hurriedly is more about saving the economic system than helping the lower middle and working classes. When people who have never experienced financial hardship have to rely on state support for a long time, a lot of people are gonna learn a lot about the viability of bootstraps. That doesn't bode well for almost anyone with the platform to push for ending lockdowns.
Why are you so dismissive of the idea that people who own small businesses that have been shut down for week or people who have been forced into unemployment by the shutdown wanting to reopen shuttered businesses?
CptJake wrote: Pretty easy to say money isn't king or ridicule those who place a high value on economic activity if you're not the person who is furloughed and can't pay rent or mortgage and wonders how they're going to feed their family.
Those are pretty base needs. When your capability to secure them is taken away, you might have the opinion getting back to work is a damned good thing.
Alternatively, you might have the opinion that the state needs to step in.
It's perfectly reasonable for people to fret about their ability to survive but it's problematic to conflate that arbitrarily with 'reopening the economy'. I would suggest that large business, national, and supranational concerns about and advocacy for reopening the economy hurriedly is more about saving the economic system than helping the lower middle and working classes. When people who have never experienced financial hardship have to rely on state support for a long time, a lot of people are gonna learn a lot about the viability of bootstraps. That doesn't bode well for almost anyone with the platform to push for ending lockdowns.
The state cant provide for everyone for an indefinite period though, that has been proven.
Depends on what you mean by provide. It can certainly provide for a considerable number of people for a considerable period of time.
Plus, people want to provide for themselves and their families. they dont want to be dependant on the state, they want that dignity.
51% of the public (39% of Tory voters!) backing UBI now. The majority of people are more than happy to receive support from the state. 'Supported through hardship' is not synonymous with 'dependent'.
its not just about big corporations, (although people do benefit from trickle down of those companies.) I know you will disagree because of your world view, but not everything is big business greed and the little man needing government aid.
Didn't say it was. That said, trickle down economics demonstrably does not work without significant redistributive intervention. Christ, even Adam Smith knew that.
Edit: to force it clearly back on topic. My point is that mass reopening of economies benefits late capitalism more than it does the average family, entrepreneur, or small business owner. The ratio between the two varies depending on territory and the support available, but in almost all cases the repercussions of large scale, rather than soft and gradual, returns to normal practice are far more economically damaging to most persons than sticking out a lockdown longer - as punitive as that is for many, too. The second spike will come in the winter, hurrying a return to normal (or near normal) to the point that we end up with three spikes just means more, stricter lockdowns and more dead people that never participate in economic activity again.
Genuinely think some of this will herald a new way of doing things for many businesses, especially as larger businesses realise the cost benefits of home working and the anti-collectivist benefits of having limited interaction between employees. Those that want to get up and running fast will have to facilitate all of this, and once it's in place...
There never will be a full return to normal, at least, not until we have a good vaccine, which might never happen.
Companies like the place I work, and Barclays Bank HQ, have found they can work very well with the staff working from home. Barclays may never again bring their HQ staff back to Canary Wharf.
My empoyer has prepared to keep the office closed until September. I don't miss my 2-3 hour round trip commute, and I like saving the money it costs.
Of course, that is part of how an easing of lockdown can be achieved. IDK how many office workers there are in the UK but if most of them stay at home, it takes a lot of people off the streets, busses and trains, making things safer for people like shopworkers who need to go to a premises.
We'll undoubtedly see other changes like widespread installation of heat detecting cameras to scan for potentially infectious people, perspex shields for checkout clerks, more space in aisles and cloors marked out with 2m square boxes for people to stand in.
There will have to be changes in social behaviour as well. Like if I go into the shop and there's someone looking at the goods in front of me, I need to be patient and let him find what he wants, and he needs to not take 10 minutes choosing,and the guy behind me needs to respect my space and not push past me.
As President Trump presses for states to reopen their economies, his administration is privately projecting a steady rise in the number of cases and deaths from the coronavirus over the next several weeks, reaching about 3,000 daily deaths on June 1, according to an internal document obtained by The New York Times, nearly double from the current level of about 1,750.
Needless to say, I will not be returning to the office anytime soon whether my company fully opens it or not.
There will have to be changes in social behaviour as well. Like if I go into the shop and there's someone looking at the goods in front of me, I need to be patient and let him find what he wants, and he needs to not take 10 minutes choosing,and the guy behind me needs to respect my space and not push past me.
Or just walk briskly past provided there's enough space to do so? We don't all need impenetrable 2m exclusion zones around us. You can pass next to some one with virtually no risk. Casual interactions aren't causing the spread. It's 'close contact' which, if you're not touching physically means you need to be around the person for a number of minutes, talking, interacting etc.
This is what gets me about the stupid one way arrow systsm they've put in tesco and the little stasi who glare at you should you dare to go the wrong way.
I can see some of your points queen_annes_revenge, but surely the arrows aren't a big deal? Keep everyone moving the same direction, makes for less touching and just a better flow of properly spaced people.
Aldi's has done that here, and I found it easy enough to pass someone who was looking at items, when needed (and the rest of the time, to just wait for the next person to progress forward when we were all moving at a reasonable pace).
I see we're still playing the "we need to reopen the economy" game even though economic analysis after economic analysis, regardless of bias or political leanings, have shown that to be even more harmful for the economy than just staying closed.
Pres. Trump says we can expect at least 100k corona deaths
Administration data projects 3k coronadeaths per day by early june - which suggests that we will have a lot more than 100k dead, as that would be almost 100k deaths *per month*. We are likely looking at 100k by the end of May alone.
Trump also admits that if we had done nothing at all we would have at least 1-1.5 million dead, minimum, probably a lot higher.
Russia announced 10k new cases yesterday, total of 134k, 68k of which are in Moscow. Apparently Moscows hospitals are overflowing and they are very close to a full on system collapse that we narrowly avoided in NYC. Last time Putins approval rating was this low he annexed Crimea, so things might get interesting.
RiTides wrote: I can see some of your points queen_annes_revenge, but surely the arrows aren't a big deal? Keep everyone moving the same direction, makes for less touching and just a better flow of properly spaced people.
Aldi's has done that here, and I found it easy enough to pass someone who was looking at items, when needed (and the rest of the time, to just wait for the next person to progress forward when we were all moving at a reasonable pace).
Not in my experience. I've been in more contact with more people due to the arrow systems, than I ever was when we could roam freely in the supermarket, and I avoided people as a matter of course. now youre all funnelled down the same path. even the little gaps in the middle of some aisles have been closed off so you cant use the shortcut. and ill be damned if im zig zagging the entire supermarket just to get something from the end aisle.
I'd rather spend an extra five minutes moving around the supermarket according to the flow system, than risk death by coronavirus.
In Aldi last Saturday there was a woman wearing an N95 mask, on her mouth.
In very sad virus news, Dave Greenfield, keyboardist of The Stranglers died on May the 3rd after contracting it while in hospital for a heart condition.
I have very happy memories of getting pissed as arseholes with a university mate to celebrate his engagement, and Golden Brown was playing on the jukebox.
RiTides wrote: I can see some of your points queen_annes_revenge, but surely the arrows aren't a big deal? Keep everyone moving the same direction, makes for less touching and just a better flow of properly spaced people.
Aldi's has done that here, and I found it easy enough to pass someone who was looking at items, when needed (and the rest of the time, to just wait for the next person to progress forward when we were all moving at a reasonable pace).
Yeah, I found the one-way system very effective at reducing close interaction with very little inconvenience. At worst it's 30 seconds to walk down an adjacent isle, something I see most people fine to do just out of politeness in locations organised that way outside of a pandemic.
How is forcing everyone to take the same narrow path alleviating the risk of “death by coronavirus”? If anything, if I have to step into the spot where you just sneezed or coughed, etc., and then stand there for a couple of minutes, isn’t that putting me at higher risk?
Yeah, we're doing this in the hallways at work and it seems... counterproductive. We're also funneling everyone into the same entrance and same exit, which makes no sense.
Manchu wrote: How is forcing everyone to take the same narrow path alleviating the risk of “death by coronavirus”? If anything, if I have to step into the spot where you just sneezed or coughed, etc., and then stand there for a couple of minutes, isn’t that putting me at higher risk?
This was my thought process..it can also make the process unnecessarily long for those who don't needs as many items, increasing their time inside and putting them at higher risk of exposure.
Plus, I'm human, I forget stuff. I'm not going all the way back round, I'm turning and walking the way I came.
As President Trump presses for states to reopen their economies, his administration is privately projecting a steady rise in the number of cases and deaths from the coronavirus over the next several weeks, reaching about 3,000 daily deaths on June 1, according to an internal document obtained by The New York Times, nearly double from the current level of about 1,750.
Needless to say, I will not be returning to the office anytime soon whether my company fully opens it or not.
Having this happen in a Presidential Election year is not going to be helpful...
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
Small nitpick, but the US is only somewhat bigger than all four of those combined. They're around 220 million altogether, while the US is ~330 million. Half again isn't nothing, certainly, but Europe isn't as small as you're making it out to be.
Overread wrote: Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number.
Do you mean bigger in landmass or population? US pop is approx 330m. The pop of those 4 countries combined is around 240m, so only 1.375 time bigger.
I'm not making any comparison between the daily death rates of the countries (dispersal of population in US is very different than western Europe, and even dispersal in UK is very different than that of the rest of western Europe), but I think its worth pointing out that the US pop isn't many many many times bigger.
(edit: and someone else posts the same thing as I'm writing)
Prestor Jon wrote: The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment
And the $600 per week Federal addition to unemployment for people affected by the Covid situation. This includes self-employed people and people with partnerships.
Also, open economy is not the only solution. There is also the solution of 'Government steps in to help people pay for things' solution that involves less people dying...
Prestor Jon wrote: The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment
And the $600 per week Federal addition to unemployment for people affected by the Covid situation. This includes self-employed people and people with partnerships.
Also, open economy is not the only solution. There is also the solution of 'Government steps in to help people pay for things' solution that involves less people dying...
This. The US is meant to be the richest country in the world. If it cannot leverage that wealth into supporting its own citizens through a natural disaster via short term increased government spending (you know, like exactly how it deals with hurricane relief, though admittedly there are those in the US government who try and oppose even that) then what is the point in making all that money?
If you don't want to do it via entirely handing out money (maybe you're afraid they won't spend it "responsibly") then you can alleviate people's difficulties by setting up aid package deliveries containing staple foods, vegetables, fruit, soap etc.
The US has more experience in this kind of response than many other first world countries due to the frequency of hurricanes, tornadoes etc. Leverage that experience.
If you don't want to do it via entirely handing out money (maybe you're afraid they won't spend it "responsibly") then you can alleviate people's difficulties by setting up aid package deliveries containing staple foods, vegetables, fruit, soap etc.
People who are concerned about "irresponsible spending" of stimulus funds aren't economically literate enough to understand the economy or to truly be concerned about the economy - irresponsible spending is exactly what you want in this situation, as it ensures that cash flows are maximized, which in turn drives the economic activity needed to create jobs and wealth, which in turn creates more cash flows, which drives more economic activity, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. This is how you *grow* an economy, not by sitting on a pile of cash.
Theres a reason why its called "stimulus funds" instead of "necessity funds" - spending it is literally the entire point.
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
And with the 'partial reopening' that's ongoing and increasing?
Here in the USA, that daily death toll is probably going to go up, not down.
If you don't want to do it via entirely handing out money (maybe you're afraid they won't spend it "responsibly") then you can alleviate people's difficulties by setting up aid package deliveries containing staple foods, vegetables, fruit, soap etc.
People who are concerned about "irresponsible spending" of stimulus funds aren't economically literate enough to understand the economy or to truly be concerned about the economy - irresponsible spending is exactly what you want in this situation, as it ensures that cash flows are maximized, which in turn drives the economic activity needed to create jobs and wealth, which in turn creates more cash flows, which drives more economic activity, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. This is how you *grow* an economy, not by sitting on a pile of cash.
Theres a reason why its called "stimulus funds" instead of "necessity funds" - spending it is literally the entire point.
Agreed. But if you supply basic goods then the people who receive them can spend the money they would otherwise have to spend on that on something else. So you are still effectively injecting cash into the system but in a way which allows for the government to deflect some of that criticism. So might be more palatable to some groups of the populace as it doesn't feel as much like the government buying people a new margarita machine, even if the end result is actually the same.
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
Yes, but Italy's number is a far more significant one than the US. Italy has a pop of 60 million. The US has a pop of 328 million. 950 deaths/60 million is way worse than 1750/328 million.
On a per capita basis, the US's death rate for coronavirus is decidedly average.
Maybe now we can get a real international force to stay ahead of and react immediately to future threats of diseases not just in countries but on a global level. Something like an Interpol or NATO dedicted disease prevention and control force.
Prestor Jon wrote: The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment
And the $600 per week Federal addition to unemployment for people affected by the Covid situation. This includes self-employed people and people with partnerships.
Matt Swain wrote: Maybe now we can get a real international force to stay ahead of and react immediately to future threats of diseases not just in countries but on a global level. Something like an Interpol or NATO dedicted disease prevention and control force.
Hey, I can dream.
Isn't that what the WHO is supposed to do?
Anyway, a more useful thing might be a strategic global reserve of non-perishable medical supplies buried in a bunker in Greenland or something.
This. The US is meant to be the richest country in the world. If it cannot leverage that wealth into supporting its own citizens through a natural disaster via short term increased government spending (you know, like exactly how it deals with hurricane relief, though admittedly there are those in the US government who try and oppose even that) then what is the point in making all that money?
If anything that's suspiciously low. US is getting off extremely light especially compared to how slow and half-hearted response to it was. Makes one wonder what kind of number fudging they are doing. But then again one state already banned releasing cause of death so...
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona.
Like for like comparisons are not possible, and we need a whole load of data not yet available to even get close, but:
According to https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus, France reached over 1,000 daily deaths on five days and the UK saw it seven times. I think some of these include weekend lags. Italy and Spain have never had 1,000 in a day. These countries are down to less than 800 combined now. We'll see what the lockdown relaxation does to that over the next couple weeks.
ONS numbers for w/e 24.04.20 (week five after lockdown began).
21,997 deaths. That's 11,500 above the 5 year average for the same week. Down 350 from the previous week and that's the first decrease since pandemic began. It is still the second highest dataset since recording began (previous week was the highest).
We're now at a total of 38,000 deaths attributed to Covid-19 over the duration of the pandemic and 42,000 deaths above the five year average for the same period.
Seeing some truly horrendous things on CNN. Never mind the sleaze bag who wiped his nose on the clerk’s sleeve, a security guard was murdered for asking someone to put the mask on. I don’t care, at this rate, you deserve all you get.
Future War Cultist wrote: Seeing some truly horrendous things on CNN. Never mind the sleaze bag who wiped his nose on the clerk’s sleeve, a security guard was murdered for asking someone to put the mask on. I don’t care, at this rate, you deserve all you get.
understandable sentiment, but thankfully the majority of people aren't that daft.
As far as killing time...I’m on paternity leave from work until the start of June, have a one month old son at home, and have been clearing models out to build the start of his college fund. For reasons I don’t wish to disclose publicly, I’m currently doing this by myself for a few weeks. So I’m a stay at home dad with 24hr parenting, waiting for things to go back to normal (even excluding the virus).
timetowaste85 wrote: As far as killing time...I’m on paternity leave from work until the start of June, have a one month old son at home, and have been clearing models out to build the start of his college fund. For reasons I don’t wish to disclose publicly, I’m currently doing this by myself for a few weeks. So I’m a stay at home dad with 24hr parenting, waiting for things to go back to normal (even excluding the virus).
Wow, that's hard. Seriously, good luck to you. Is this baby your first?
Matt Swain wrote: And we all know who's Number 1 in covid infections and deaths.
In defense of the USA, we are exceptional in all we do: second place is first loser.
USA! USA! USA!
If you're going on a per capita rating for the corona virus the US is far from the worst. That title goes to Switzerland. https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-cases-per-capita-chart-countries-2020-3 Also, we really don't know where China falls on the list. There's a really good chance the are massively underreporting their stats.
Matt Swain wrote: And we all know who's Number 1 in covid infections and deaths.
In defense of the USA, we are exceptional in all we do: second place is first loser.
USA! USA! USA!
If you're going on a per capita rating for the corona virus the US is far from the worst. That title goes to Switzerland. https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-cases-per-capita-chart-countries-2020-3 Also, we really don't know where China falls on the list. There's a really good chance the are massively underreporting their stats.
We don't know alot of things considering that some governments (cue florida) don't want to release data, or the lack of testing or or or.
timetowaste85 wrote: As far as killing time...I’m on paternity leave from work until the start of June, have a one month old son at home, and have been clearing models out to build the start of his college fund. For reasons I don’t wish to disclose publicly, I’m currently doing this by myself for a few weeks. So I’m a stay at home dad with 24hr parenting, waiting for things to go back to normal (even excluding the virus).
Good luck with the baby. Exhausting but rewarding time.
I started new hobby with oil paintings during the lockdown. Mother got good laugh out of that. She was wondering am I going stir crazy at home doing work from home and unable to meet parents/sister/nieces(usually going 2-3 weekends a month to meet the kids) and there I was having fun painting oil paintings including mother's day present I had kept quiet on the hobby to surprise her so she didn't have any idea I was doing any painting.
Might just as well find positive things and try new things with new time eh?
Time going to get reduced. Boss getting stir crazy thinking work at home isn't that productive and that he doesn't stay where things are in work(would help if he wouldn't just complain about corona 95% of daily meeting times...) so decided next week we work from office again against goverment recommendations. Ah well. Wouldn't surprise if we all get bug sooner or later. Most likely being me catching it on daily train and infect rest. Well boss is the one in biggest risk from age and underlying conditions so if that happens he'll bear the effect of his decision.
edit: unsurprisingly UK went for own app rather than use google/apple ready made api to get centralized database instead. Hopefully finland doesn't go that route.
Like for Like comparisons between countries can be done by using the excess mortality statistic. That is the increase in the number of deaths compared to years without Covid-19. Some of the extra deaths will have bene caused by people having a heart attack and not going to A&E, or increased domestic violence, but most of them will be due to the virus.
Of course if you don't count the deaths or don't release the stats, you've got nothing to compare. It's hard to believe a 1st world democratic government would take such a course of action, though.
Don't get me wrong, I agree it is hard to believe they'd do it, and think they could 'get away with it' and/or hide it, but sadly, it is happening.
Yup. I mean, from their point of view they only need to keep it buried until the day after the votes are cast. Doesn't matter one jot if it all comes out the next day as people can't take back their vote.
So it isn't even like thinking you won't get caught, it's just gambling that you drag it out long enough to the point where it no longer matters. Appeal every court decision, delay until the absolute deadline before you comply with court orders etc.
nfe wrote: Dr Jenny Harries, UK deputy CMO, finally concedes to the Health Select Committee that testing policy was led by capacity rather than strategy.
nfe wrote: Dr Jenny Harries, UK deputy CMO, finally concedes to the Health Select Committee that testing policy was led by capacity rather than strategy.
Oh dear. Colossal cock up there. I know someone who worked on DNA primers for their Biology Bsc, though that was for identifying the presence of demon shrimp.
That the CDC would mess up such a test is quite astonishing. It really highlights the need to get this kind of thing set up as early as possible so these kinds of issues can be identified and fixed ASAP.
Don't get me wrong, I agree it is hard to believe they'd do it, and think they could 'get away with it' and/or hide it, but sadly, it is happening.
We've managed to politicize mask-wearing. Which makes it somewhat worthless if everyone isn't doing it.
But the pièce de résistance is obviously how politicized *treatments* have become.
Unfortunately I think we have to own everything that's coming to us. I don't want to use the word 'deserve' because we're talking about deaths. But we all helped create this situation. We let politics into our lives in places where they shouldn't be, and we've treated politics like life and death. And now that ACTUAL life and death situations are here, we're unable to untangle the politics from them.
I wish I could see a solution, but I think this thing is just leading to more fingerpointing and blame. And potentially of a more aggressive nature, given that the stakes are so much higher than with 'political issue X'.
If anything that's suspiciously low. US is getting off extremely light especially compared to how slow and half-hearted response to it was. Makes one wonder what kind of number fudging they are doing. But then again one state already banned releasing cause of death so...
You don't have to fudge the numbers if you're not doing legally mandated, free, or easily accessible testing. When Florida coroners leaked that bit, the governor was doing a presser with the Cheeto in Chief.
I said it before, and I'll repeat again: Right now, in the US? It seems that if you're not filthy stinking rich, friends with the President, or directly exposed to someone who died from COVID-there's not easy ways to get tested. For the first time since this all began, I got contacted by my healthcare provider saying they are now offering testing...but it's specifically antibody testing.
"We" didn't do this. One group did. One group which has consistently been reinforcing their ridiculous narratives thanks to a specific "news" network. One group which has consistently changed the rules whenever things go against them.
nfe wrote: Dr Jenny Harries, UK deputy CMO, finally concedes to the Health Select Committee that testing policy was led by capacity rather than strategy.
Oh dear. Colossal cock up there. I know someone who worked on DNA primers for their Biology Bsc, though that was for identifying the presence of demon shrimp.
That the CDC would mess up such a test is quite astonishing. It really highlights the need to get this kind of thing set up as early as possible so these kinds of issues can be identified and fixed ASAP.
Probably same way as UK with it's corona tests that didn't work that it paid millions for.
Don't get me wrong, I agree it is hard to believe they'd do it, and think they could 'get away with it' and/or hide it, but sadly, it is happening.
We've managed to politicize mask-wearing. Which makes it somewhat worthless if everyone isn't doing it.
But the pièce de résistance is obviously how politicized *treatments* have become.
Unfortunately I think we have to own everything that's coming to us. I don't want to use the word 'deserve' because we're talking about deaths. But we all helped create this situation. We let politics into our lives in places where they shouldn't be, and we've treated politics like life and death. And now that ACTUAL life and death situations are here, we're unable to untangle the politics from them.
I wish I could see a solution, but I think this thing is just leading to more fingerpointing and blame. And potentially of a more aggressive nature, given that the stakes are so much higher than with 'political issue X'.
Every interaction within society as a whole is political if the society deems itself democratic, the difference is how politics are conducted, it is not uncommon to Find over here opposite Party memebers going out together drinking a beer or helping each other out.
Otoh you got polarized systems which tend to break down society into smaller groups.
nfe wrote: Dr Jenny Harries, UK deputy CMO, finally concedes to the Health Select Committee that testing policy was led by capacity rather than strategy.
Oh dear. Colossal cock up there. I know someone who worked on DNA primers for their Biology Bsc, though that was for identifying the presence of demon shrimp.
That the CDC would mess up such a test is quite astonishing. It really highlights the need to get this kind of thing set up as early as possible so these kinds of issues can be identified and fixed ASAP.
Probably same way as UK with it's corona tests that didn't work that it paid millions for.
Kanluwen wrote: "We" didn't do this. One group did. One group which has consistently been reinforcing their ridiculous narratives thanks to a specific "news" network. One group which has consistently changed the rules whenever things go against them.
For masks, it's one side. For something else, it's the other side. Go to CNN at any given moment, and it's full of dumb, 'above the fold' opinion pieces catering to and/or fostering outrage on the left. Right now we have:
Analysis: Trump can't make us normal again
Opinion: Why I can live without beef
Opinion: The pandemic is showing why women are better leaders
The first step to getting past this is to take personal responsibility and stop reinforcing the behavior. Blaming the other side for *everything* is how we got a dysfunctional government and society. Things that are holding us back during a health crisis. And things that keep taking this thread off-topic.
Kanluwen wrote: "We" didn't do this. One group did. One group which has consistently been reinforcing their ridiculous narratives thanks to a specific "news" network. One group which has consistently changed the rules whenever things go against them.
For masks, it's one side. For something else, it's the other side. Go to CNN at any given moment, and it's full of dumb, 'above the fold' opinion pieces catering to and/or fostering outrage on the left. Right now we have:
Opinion: Why I can live without beef
Wow, what a needlessly controversial, politically charged outrage piece. /s
Can you even imagine if, during one of the other global events that necessitated rationing or abstaining from certain household products, it was decried as political pot-stirring to write an opinion piece talking about how we can live without that thing temporarily?
Don't get me wrong, I agree it is hard to believe they'd do it, and think they could 'get away with it' and/or hide it, but sadly, it is happening.
We've managed to politicize mask-wearing. Which makes it somewhat worthless if everyone isn't doing it.
But the pièce de résistance is obviously how politicized *treatments* have become.
Unfortunately I think we have to own everything that's coming to us. I don't want to use the word 'deserve' because we're talking about deaths. But we all helped create this situation. We let politics into our lives in places where they shouldn't be, and we've treated politics like life and death. And now that ACTUAL life and death situations are here, we're unable to untangle the politics from them.
I wish I could see a solution, but I think this thing is just leading to more fingerpointing and blame. And potentially of a more aggressive nature, given that the stakes are so much higher than with 'political issue X'.
You may not want to, but I will. We deserve this. Humanity deserves this. We are only getting out what we have been putting in.
Kanluwen wrote: "We" didn't do this. One group did. One group which has consistently been reinforcing their ridiculous narratives thanks to a specific "news" network. One group which has consistently changed the rules whenever things go against them.
For masks, it's one side. For something else, it's the other side. Go to CNN at any given moment, and it's full of dumb, 'above the fold' opinion pieces catering to and/or fostering outrage on the left. Right now we have:
Analysis: Trump can't make us normal again
Opinion: Why I can live without beef
Opinion: The pandemic is showing why women are better leaders
The first step to getting past this is to take personal responsibility and stop reinforcing the behavior. Blaming the other side for *everything* is how we got a dysfunctional government and society. Things that are holding us back during a health crisis. And things that keep taking this thread off-topic.
Pro tip: if it is US news and labelled an opinion piece, ignore it. It is not even sanctioned by the news organisation it comes from as their position.
I have to admit, I imagined that the reason things were so polarized politically in the US was because the Cold War was over, and the stakes for everything were so low. We could afford to look inward and battle internally about the "little stuff" like culture wars. Things are never so petty as when the stakes are so low.
I had hoped that larger stakes would change the way we approach things. However, perhaps the CoronaVirus stakes are still small potatoes as they are not an existential national threat level yet.
Sometimes, I miss the Cold War.... which is a horrible thing to say.
Easy E wrote: I have to admit, I imagined that the reason things were so polarized politically in the US was because the Cold War was over, and the stakes for everything were so low. We could afford to look inward and battle internally about the "little stuff" like culture wars. Things are never so petty as when the stakes are so low.
I had hoped that larger stakes would change the way we approach things. However, perhaps the CoronaVirus stakes are still small potatoes as they are not an existential national threat level yet.
Sometimes, I miss the Cold War.... which is a horrible thing to say.
If anything that's suspiciously low. US is getting off extremely light especially compared to how slow and half-hearted response to it was. Makes one wonder what kind of number fudging they are doing. But then again one state already banned releasing cause of death so...
You don't have to fudge the numbers if you're not doing legally mandated, free, or easily accessible testing. When Florida coroners leaked that bit, the governor was doing a presser with the Cheeto in Chief.
I said it before, and I'll repeat again: Right now, in the US? It seems that if you're not filthy stinking rich, friends with the President, or directly exposed to someone who died from COVID-there's not easy ways to get tested. For the first time since this all began, I got contacted by my healthcare provider saying they are now offering testing...but it's specifically antibody testing.
My experience is completely different. I walked into the outpatient care office at the local hospital back in March and was told I had to be tested for Coronavirus, even though I went in for something completely unrelated. There were other people in the tent outside the emergency room (which acted as the testing site), and they'd already been doing this for days. No one looked like they fit any of your criteria (one guy two chairs down looked like the very stereotype of 'white trash') and the first local death didn't happen until almost two weeks later, so couldn't have been your last bit of criteria.
At the time (and during a followup phone call) I was assured I wouldn't be billed for any of it. Not even the non-Corona ECG they did in passing to check on my actual symptoms.
Now I'm not in a hotspot, but your narrative is completely unrecognizable compared to what I've actually experienced.
Easy E wrote: I have to admit, I imagined that the reason things were so polarized politically in the US was because the Cold War was over, and the stakes for everything were so low. We could afford to look inward and battle internally about the "little stuff" like culture wars. Things are never so petty as when the stakes are so low.
I had hoped that larger stakes would change the way we approach things. However, perhaps the CoronaVirus stakes are still small potatoes as they are not an existential national threat level yet.
Sometimes, I miss the Cold War.... which is a horrible thing to say.
I think we're already in a new Cold War...with basically the same players as before. It's just being fought through computer technology more than big proxy wars, space programs and sports. And all the online manipulation is aimed at turning events like pandemics into things that divide rather than unite.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Pro tip: if it is US news and labelled an opinion piece, ignore it. It is not even sanctioned by the news organisation it comes from as their position.
But of course it still matters. Is it not dangerous to have personalities on a certain network push quack cures because they're technically opinion shows?
By putting obviously slanted opinion pieces 'above the fold' on a website or on your network in a format that looks like a news report, you're sanctioning it. The "Opinion:" disclaimer may make it *unofficial*, but the sanction is implied. It's like saying "no offense, but" and then saying something clearly offensive. The message is still sent.
Bringing this back more on topic, of course there are some dangerous messages involving C-19 on right-wing media. But if I'm being honest and fair, I have to admit that the left-wing tends to push the panic button and spread despair over every little thing coming out of the WH. That may not be equivalent, but all the BLAAARGH isn't necessarily responsible or high-minded behavior either. It's there to get click$.
We have entire generations who seem fundamentally unable to genuinely consider the other side of an argument. To take a breath, put themselves in another's shoes, assume them to be reasonable, and think about how they came to that opinion. It's a real problem, and it's going to keep costing us lives as we bicker over basic public health policies.
Easy E wrote: I have to admit, I imagined that the reason things were so polarized politically in the US was because the Cold War was over, and the stakes for everything were so low. We could afford to look inward and battle internally about the "little stuff" like culture wars. Things are never so petty as when the stakes are so low.
I had hoped that larger stakes would change the way we approach things. However, perhaps the CoronaVirus stakes are still small potatoes as they are not an existential national threat level yet.
Sometimes, I miss the Cold War.... which is a horrible thing to say.
isn't that a bit too rose tinted goggles?
Absolutely.
It is one of the few perks of being old! Things were better in my day! LOL
Easy E wrote: I have to admit, I imagined that the reason things were so polarized politically in the US was because the Cold War was over, and the stakes for everything were so low. We could afford to look inward and battle internally about the "little stuff" like culture wars. Things are never so petty as when the stakes are so low.
I had hoped that larger stakes would change the way we approach things. However, perhaps the CoronaVirus stakes are still small potatoes as they are not an existential national threat level yet.
Sometimes, I miss the Cold War.... which is a horrible thing to say.
isn't that a bit too rose tinted goggles?
Absolutely.
It is one of the few perks of being old! Things were better in my day! LOL
NinthMusketeer wrote: Pro tip: if it is US news and labelled an opinion piece, ignore it. It is not even sanctioned by the news organisation it comes from as their position.
But of course it still matters. Is it not dangerous to have personalities on a certain network push quack cures because they're technically opinion shows?
By putting obviously slanted opinion pieces 'above the fold' on a website or on your network in a format that looks like a news report, you're sanctioning it. The "Opinion:" disclaimer may make it *unofficial*, but the sanction is implied. It's like saying "no offense, but" and then saying something clearly offensive. The message is still sent.
Bringing this back more on topic, of course there are some dangerous messages involving C-19 on right-wing media. But if I'm being honest and fair, I have to admit that the left-wing tends to push the panic button and spread despair over every little thing coming out of the WH. That may not be equivalent, but all the BLAAARGH isn't necessarily responsible or high-minded behavior either. It's there to get click$.
We have entire generations who seem fundamentally unable to genuinely consider the other side of an argument. To take a breath, put themselves in another's shoes, assume them to be reasonable, and think about how they came to that opinion. It's a real problem, and it's going to keep costing us lives as we bicker over basic public health policies.
What you described is Polarisation and it's Problems 101.
The also often feared issue of more direct democratic Systems might i add of course with the charismatic demagogue beeing place 1 .
Also the whole opinion piece thing, is that really what happened with quack remedies? Over here opinion pieces in General Concern cultural and political, Economical or even historical or philosophical opinions on actual matters and visions of a future but certainly not medical pushes for "remedies" .
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
And with the 'partial reopening' that's ongoing and increasing?
Here in the USA, that daily death toll is probably going to go up, not down.
Exactly. Things went about as bad as it can get in Spain and Italy but the trend is downwards now at least. I feel like the US pandemic is just building up a head of steam right now.
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
I was talking about Italy. I think everyone understands the US is the epicentre now. Seems like about one third of all cases in the world of COVID are in the States right now.
Prof Fergusson resigns after breaking lockdown guidance to meet married lover... Don't think it's relevant really, as that in and of itself is not a reason to discredit his work, as some are suggesting, but it is quite funny.
We have entire generations who seem fundamentally unable to genuinely consider the other side of an argument. To take a breath, put themselves in another's shoes, assume them to be reasonable, and think about how they came to that opinion. It's a real problem, and it's going to keep costing us lives as we bicker over basic public health policies.
The problem is that this is based upon the flawed assumption that the arguments are both worth considering. More commonly than not(as we see in the conspiracy theory thread), that isn't the case.
That also assumes that "putting themselves in another person's shoes" and "assume them to be reasonable" are not things that give credence to bad faith arguments....which, again, more commonly than not it does.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle.
The issue isn't whether or not that the argument is worth considering, the issue is people decide on whether they agree with the argument based on who is advancing it.
Azreal13 wrote: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle.
The issue isn't whether or not that the argument is worth considering, the issue is people decide on whether they agree with the argument based on who is advancing it.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Pro tip: if it is US news and labelled an opinion piece, ignore it. It is not even sanctioned by the news organisation it comes from as their position.
But of course it still matters. Is it not dangerous to have personalities on a certain network push quack cures because they're technically opinion shows?
By putting obviously slanted opinion pieces 'above the fold' on a website or on your network in a format that looks like a news report, you're sanctioning it. The "Opinion:" disclaimer may make it *unofficial*, but the sanction is implied. It's like saying "no offense, but" and then saying something clearly offensive. The message is still sent.
Bringing this back more on topic, of course there are some dangerous messages involving C-19 on right-wing media. But if I'm being honest and fair, I have to admit that the left-wing tends to push the panic button and spread despair over every little thing coming out of the WH. That may not be equivalent, but all the BLAAARGH isn't necessarily responsible or high-minded behavior either. It's there to get click$.
We have entire generations who seem fundamentally unable to genuinely consider the other side of an argument. To take a breath, put themselves in another's shoes, assume them to be reasonable, and think about how they came to that opinion. It's a real problem, and it's going to keep costing us lives as we bicker over basic public health policies.
Hm, I feel I made my position unclear. I meant it in the sense of 'US news is bad enough already, one can spare themselves needless torment by ignoring the worst parts.'
The NZ lockdown has been challenged in the courts here as two men tried suing the PM, Health Minister and the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management for illegal detainment. Their appeal was unsuccessful (due to the fact that they tried to have it heard as a case of habeas corpus) but it has raised the issue in the courts as to the overall legality of the situation.
NZ has now had 21 fatalities (with the most recent being in the same nursing home that has seen eleven others dead) and only two new cases reported today and our cabinet will be looking at further easing restrictions on the 11th May. The new restrictions will allow most business to reopen, travel outside of ones region and larger gatherings (100 people indoors, 500 people outside). So pretty much life as normal.
Not at all. Corona and the economic damage is putting damage to trump's relection and EVERYTHING he does is aimed at november. Polls are showing him to be trailing so he's desperate to change course. And if his gamble fails and millions die? Who cares. His relection is all that matters.
trump has tied himself to strong economy. Economy that is getting hurt. Thus trump's primary goal is kickstart economy.
If trump has 2 options. Do nothing and lose 100% and try kickstarting economy that gives him relection 1% time and 100 million dead american 99% times he goes for the econony kickstart because it's only way he would have relection. Number of deaths if he tries and fails is irrelevant.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Prof Fergusson resigns after breaking lockdown guidance to meet married lover... Don't think it's relevant really, as that in and of itself is not a reason to discredit his work, as some are suggesting, but it is quite funny.
The story breaking yesterday, and every single paper thy put it on it's front cover today (The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Times, and The Telegraph) being right wing publications that did not put UK having the highest death toll in Europe on their front page is not a coincidence.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other (very related) news, several of the right-wing papers are pushing a leaked story about the chancellor planning to cut furlough pay very soon to 'wean' those who're 'addicted' to it off. To 60% then further incremental drops afterwards.
So that's us headed quickly for the 'people receiving financial support during a pandemic are just benefits scroungers' narrative much quicker than expected.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other (very related) news, several of the right-wing papers are pushing a leaked story about the chancellor planning to cut furlough pay very soon to 'wean' those who're 'addicted' to it off. To 60% then further incremental drops afterwards.
So that's us headed quickly for the 'people receiving financial support during a pandemic are just benefits scroungers' narrative much quicker than expected.
I mean, by all means debate the ammount of social security payments and programms, allways do so, but in such a scenario isn't that like killing off another chunk of custommers for the economy and that's definetly not the time to throw out the remaining custommer base out the window.
Also in general there are very few people actually addicted to such payments so this is just questionable at best.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other (very related) news, several of the right-wing papers are pushing a leaked story about the chancellor planning to cut furlough pay very soon to 'wean' those who're 'addicted' to it off. To 60% then further incremental drops afterwards.
So that's us headed quickly for the 'people receiving financial support during a pandemic are just benefits scroungers' narrative much quicker than expected.
I mean, by all means debate the ammount of social security payments and programms, allways do so, but in such a scenario isn't that like killing off another chunk of custommers for the economy and that's definetly not the time to throw out the remaining custommer base out the window.
Also in general there are very few people actually addicted to such payments so this is just questionable at best.
I think you are right here. most people want to work and support themselves and their family. however, I do worry that the nationwide instilled fear will stop some people from going back to work, so this needs to be done in tandem with targeted campaigns of information letting people know that they don't need to be paralysed with fear of leaving their homes.
The government cant support everyone forever (As I have stated before) but a better way of accomplishing this goal would be to allow people to work again.
so this needs to be done in tandem with targeted campaigns of information letting people know that they don't need to be paralysed with fear of leaving their homes.
Massively dependent on the actual meassure of reach of information the government in question have and how they interact with buisness, seeing them as distinct from them or as just another part of them.
The government cant support everyone forever (As I have stated before) but a better way of accomplishing this goal would be to allow people to work again.
For sure, but in measured approaches, also regardless this is still a crisis and i'd be all for anticyclical behaviour of the state akin to classic keynesianism if the actual budgets for most european nations wouldn't look like a collections of I.O.U.
I'm pretty sure my brother hasn't even received any payment from the government yet, and they're talking about reducing it so people don't get hooked on it??? FFS!
Crispy78 wrote: I'm pretty sure my brother hasn't even received any payment from the government yet, and they're talking about reducing it so people don't get hooked on it??? FFS!
It completly also disregards any knowledge gathered from other crisis and goes completely against any and all established doctrine of economic policy.
Which is why i am quite confused about it.
Crispy78 wrote: I'm pretty sure my brother hasn't even received any payment from the government yet, and they're talking about reducing it so people don't get hooked on it??? FFS!
It completly also disregards any knowledge gathered from other crisis and goes completely against any and all established doctrine of economic policy.
Which is why i am quite confused about it.
The conservative party and economic literacy don't really go hand in hand
I just saw the video out of Georgia on the news. Absolutely chilling. I would say that there’s no way they’ll get away with it but then again, it’s the south.
Several EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK) have seen in excess of 1K deaths a day related to Corona. When you consider that the USA is many many many times bigger than even all four of those combined, its a very believable number. If anything based on the EU numbers its actually low at present. Potentially 1K deaths per state could be a valid figure. Though with the way its rolling over the USA chances are you "shouldn't" get that, instead you'd see it as a staggered effect as some states move through the curve of first infections at different rates.
The real risk is that with several states already opening up you might start to see second waves even before other states finish their first.
In short - yeah its scary that's why the world is going nuts over it.
I seem to recall Italy in its darkest days was about 950 deaths per day. Did it go above 1,000 at some point?
I was talking about Italy. I think everyone understands the US is the epicentre now. Seems like about one third of all cases in the world of COVID are in the States right now.
I was replying to your first post where you said Americans, just to get is on the same page.
ingtaer wrote: The NZ lockdown has been challenged in the courts here as two men tried suing the PM, Health Minister and the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management for illegal detainment. Their appeal was unsuccessful (due to the fact that they tried to have it heard as a case of habeas corpus) but it has raised the issue in the courts as to the overall legality of the situation.
NZ has now had 21 fatalities (with the most recent being in the same nursing home that has seen eleven others dead) and only two new cases reported today and our cabinet will be looking at further easing restrictions on the 11th May. The new restrictions will allow most business to reopen, travel outside of ones region and larger gatherings (100 people indoors, 500 people outside). So pretty much life as normal.
This sounds like a case where you really can do contact tracing and targetted quarantines.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: The government cant support everyone forever (As I have stated before) but a better way of accomplishing this goal would be to allow people to work again.
Literally no one ever has expressed the idea the government, any government, should be supporting everyone forever.
However, it's possible they can make it worse by re-opening the economy, leading to a second wave of deaths, leading to even bigger economic impacts. This is what a non-grossly-misrepresented example of the other side's argument is.
Is he actually able/planning to do this or was his mouth just running at an interview? Because Trump strikes me as the kind who tends to not really go into things with a long plan and instead tends to just say what's at the front of his mind or what he thinks people want to hear in the interview he's giving. Election year or not I can't see how he can make such claims and have it actually go through the system. It strikes me a bit like many of his claims and comments; a running series of words that aren't really supposed to end up policy.
As for UK payments, the tricky time is between lockdowns. When some of the population might well return to work, but might also be getting government payouts. It's a nightmare in terms of administration to keep up with people; remove abusers of the system; avoid confusion and attempt to manage it so that you're not paying people whilst they are also taking their full wage. If anything people are less likely to want payments to continue compared to companies. A company taking less for months might well want government to keep paying out for longer so the company can save money even once they start earning in order to cover built up debt and loss of earnings over the time they've been shut down.
Wisconsin's Safe-at-Home policies are also being challenged in the State Supreme Court.
Of course, there is also a lot of astro-turfing involved with the case as well, and political gamesmanship since WI is a swing state, that recently had a big election where the Governor (and the Cabinet) switch from R to D.
This Virus and the response is just another political football.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Hm, I feel I made my position unclear. I meant it in the sense of 'US news is bad enough already, one can spare themselves needless torment by ignoring the worst parts.'
Automatically Appended Next Post: In other (very related) news, several of the right-wing papers are pushing a leaked story about the chancellor planning to cut furlough pay very soon to 'wean' those who're 'addicted' to it off. To 60% then further incremental drops afterwards.
So that's us headed quickly for the 'people receiving financial support during a pandemic are just benefits scroungers' narrative much quicker than expected.
I mean, by all means debate the ammount of social security payments and programms, allways do so, but in such a scenario isn't that like killing off another chunk of custommers for the economy and that's definetly not the time to throw out the remaining custommer base out the window.
Also in general there are very few people actually addicted to such payments so this is just questionable at best.
It could be very different in other countries, but in the US that is a pretty significant issue. I'm an essential worker who makes less than people do on unemployment and I have no hazard pay. Due to the limitations on unemployment, I cannot quit/leave because I live at home to take care of my high risk parents. The second I do that, I no longer qualify for unemployment. So other than a sense of patriotism or duty, what incentive is there to go back into work where its higher risk, lower pay, and disqualifies you from unemployment checks going forward? Addiction isn't the right term, but there are definitely incentives for staying off the workforce if unemployment is the more profitable option.
possible easing of lockdowns from monday in the uk. this is excellent news. lockdowners have had their turn, now we can see what happens if measures are relaxed.
I just hope they don't come out with some bs like you can have 5 mandated visitors allowed in your house or some other nonsense like that.
I'd like to see outdoor spaces (gyms, parks, play areas) re open somewhat, restrictions on movement, leaving the home and staying outside the home removed, aswell as the silly police powers. maybe allow nurseries and infant schools to return too. one can hope.
I’m a little uneasy with the easing of restrictions. Mostly because there’s a certain crowd who’ll take any easing as ‘ah, that’s it all over then’ and just go straight back to normal. But they have to come eventually.
The latest Private Eye has a list of the big British companies owned by multi-millionaires who live in tax havens which are claiming a ton of money to furlough workers and so on.
Of course the government money is needed by those workers, it's just a pity the owners aren't paying into the system.
I’m glad you raised that point. As an unashamed capitalist, I despise that crowd. There’s only one word to describe them; parasites. Capital, money, is the grease needed to keep the wheels turning. A consumer based economy only works when there’s plenty of consuming going on. Those who take all that money out of the system to hoard in their big pile, like Smaug with a heart condition, wreck it all. Without that money the whole thing grinds to a halt.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m glad you raised that point. As an unashamed capitalist, I despise that crowd. There’s only one word to describe them; parasites. Capital, money, is the grease needed to keep the wheels turning. A consumer based economy only works when there’s plenty of consuming going on. Those who take all that money out of the system to hoard in their big pile wreck it all. Without that money the whole thing grinds to a halt.
Sadly that is the capitalism endgame unless it can be curtailed with socialism and regulations upon the free market to block such movement of capital.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m glad you raised that point. As an unashamed capitalist, I despise that crowd. There’s only one word to describe them; parasites. Capital, money, is the grease needed to keep the wheels turning. A consumer based economy only works when there’s plenty of consuming going on. Those who take all that money out of the system to hoard in their big pile, like Smaug with a heart condition, wreck it all. Without that money the whole thing grinds to a halt.
Which is why it's unsustainable and will eventually crash and boom and die anyway
Azreal13 wrote: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle.
The issue isn't whether or not that the argument is worth considering, the issue is people decide on whether they agree with the argument based on who is advancing it.
The thing is, some people have such horrid, horrible, damaging and in some cases, deadly, beliefs, that they are not worth considering.
For an extreme example, killing homosexuals. Why should i even entertain that idea or put myself in their shoes?
For a less extreme, belief in climate change denial, Its such a proven thing, that people who deny it, should be laughed off the stage of the world.
You dont need to put yourself in someone elses shoes qall thr time, infact I would say most of the time.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matt Swain wrote: One side effect of the corona lockdown is that a lot of single guys used to going out or ordering in now have to fend for themselves.
This has resulted in a big spike on videogame traffic and tv dinner sales.
So, if you're alone, passing time with video games and living on tv dinners, here's a video for YOU!
Funny, i was kinda one of those guys, I mostly just made sandwiches.
Im using it to learn to cook better, the other day i made homemade veggie burgers.
Azreal13 wrote: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle.
The issue isn't whether or not that the argument is worth considering, the issue is people decide on whether they agree with the argument based on who is advancing it.
The thing is, some people have such horrid, horrible, damaging and in some cases, deadly, beliefs, that they are not worth considering.
For an extreme example, killing homosexuals. Why should i even entertain that idea or put myself in their shoes?
For a less extreme, belief in climate change denial, Its such a proven thing, that people who deny it, should be laughed off the stage of the world.
You dont need to put yourself in someone elses shoes qall thr time, infact I would say most of the time.
.
Except the very second you consider those arguments, you've already entertained them. Nobody's saying you need to spend hours thinking about the nuance, some concepts are so abhorrent that you can readily dismiss them after considering them for next to no time at all, but you can't decide to dismiss them until you've considered them.
Needless to say though, this is a pretty facile example. Once the argument is more sophisticated with shades of grey and positives and negatives on both sides, the statement becomes a lot more relevant.
It does, if someone wants to reopen because they are worried about not only their home and businesses, the possible collapse of infrastructure and the change in education system, yeahh i can entertain that.
IF you want to reopen because you need a hairvut and want your NFL to come back, ill laugh at your face.
The thing is, alot of arguments os of late, tend to fall into the latter rather than the former.
We have entire generations who seem fundamentally unable to genuinely consider the other side of an argument. To take a breath, put themselves in another's shoes, assume them to be reasonable, and think about how they came to that opinion. It's a real problem, and it's going to keep costing us lives as we bicker over basic public health policies.
The problem is that this is based upon the flawed assumption that the arguments are both worth considering. More commonly than not(as we see in the conspiracy theory thread), that isn't the case.
That also assumes that "putting themselves in another person's shoes" and "assume them to be reasonable" are not things that give credence to bad faith arguments....which, again, more commonly than not it does.
Azreal13 wrote: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle.
The issue isn't whether or not that the argument is worth considering, the issue is people decide on whether they agree with the argument based on who is advancing it.
The thing is, some people have such horrid, horrible, damaging and in some cases, deadly, beliefs, that they are not worth considering.
For an extreme example, killing homosexuals. Why should i even entertain that idea or put myself in their shoes?
For a less extreme, belief in climate change denial, Its such a proven thing, that people who deny it, should be laughed off the stage of the world.
You dont need to put yourself in someone elses shoes qall thr time, infact I would say most of the time.
Having an open mind and putting yourself into somebody else's shoes doesn't require a person to give any credence whatsoever to the truthfulness or value of somebody's else's ideas or beliefs it's entirely about understanding that whatever the idea or belief is it is being held by a fellow human being. You can disagree with ideas without dismissing somebody's personhood or humanity.
You guys seem to be in an awfully big hurry to write people off for the crime of being wrong. The objective isn't to find validity in a person's argument the purpose is to find the common human condition behind their motivation. One person see's their family owned small business failing because of the pandemic and he/she knows that they don't have the savings or the years of time to build up another one if it fails and don't see a clear way to earn the same level of income without it. That person is motivated by the very human emotions of fear, anxiety and desire to provide for one's self and loved ones. Therefore that person wants to reopen their business as soon as possible. Holding the opposite view is a person who is very concerned with safety during the pandemic, knows that they have loved ones who are very vulnerable to the virus, they are concerned for their family, their society and their way of life. Again, a very reasonable and human motivation from the emotions of fear, anxiety and feeling love and responsibility for others. Their views may be diametrically opposed but they're coming from common ground so they can put themselves into each other's shoes to understand WHY they believe what they do and have EMPATHY and UNDERSTANDING for each other as people while still believing that opposing views are wrong. You don't need to blind yourself to the flaws in arguments or ideas to see that all people share basic commonalities with each other that can be bridges to understanding each other simply from being fellow humans. I want to stand in another person's shoes to better understand their PERSPECTIVE not their argument and every perspective is seen from the common lens of human existence.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: It does, if someone wants to reopen because they are worried about not only their home and businesses, the possible collapse of infrastructure and the change in education system, yeahh i can entertain that.
IF you want to reopen because you need a hairvut and want your NFL to come back, ill laugh at your face.
The thing is, alot of arguments os of late, tend to fall into the latter rather than the former.
How many conversations have you had with other people lately wherein they have declared that they want society to reopen because he/she needs a haircut and wants to watch sports? You would need to converse with a very large number of people to make sweeping generalizations about them with any degree of accuracy. Who is framing the argument here? The people actually conversing or is this based on discussing the topic within an imposed framework from media reports, politics, etc that want us to limit ourselves to specific perspectives and value judgements?
Went out for the weekly shop a day early (because May Day Bank Holiday moved and Thursday is likely to be busy with everyone panicking before Friday). There was a distinct uptick in people out and about. More people and more groups of people were around. Towns are still ghosts compared to what they were before, but there is certainly far more moving around going on today.
Supermarket staff even said that they were getting more groups rather than one person going around doing the shopping (I had to disappoint the Morrisons Security Guard I'm sure because after agreeing with him regarding people going in in groups being a bad thing - I went and walked out with a small troll with only non-essential* contents - in fairness that's only because Aldi (one supermarket over) where we do the main shop doesn't sell cakes, wrapping paper and coal)
Government starting to talk about things easing off has already had an impact along with good weather and many people just being clearly fed up with it and wanting to get some normality.
*and one can make the argument that they are essential if I have to survive lockdown with my mother for another year
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m a little uneasy with the easing of restrictions. Mostly because there’s a certain crowd who’ll take any easing as ‘ah, that’s it all over then’ and just go straight back to normal. But they have to come eventually.
Possibly, but the effects that will have on the spread will be negligible in my opinion. The vast majority will continue to act as they have been for the last 7 weeks most likely.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: I went and walked out with a small troll with only non-essential* contents
*and one can make the argument that they are essential if I have to survive lockdown with my mother for another year
Careful, you'll have the old bill knocking on your door.
I feel you Overread . I was able to take my family to the beach this week, as where I am they have opened up. We stayed farrrrrrr away from any other people, drew a circle in the sand around our area like suggested, etc etc... but it was glorious . Having little kids cooped up inside has been a challenge, getting them out in the fresh air (but still socially distant) was a huge relief!
queen_annes_revenge wrote:possible easing of lockdowns from monday in the uk. this is excellent news. lockdowners have had their turn, now we can see what happens if measures are relaxed.
I just hope they don't come out with some bs like you can have 5 mandated visitors allowed in your house or some other nonsense like that.
I'd like to see outdoor spaces (gyms, parks, play areas) re open somewhat, restrictions on movement, leaving the home and staying outside the home removed, aswell as the silly police powers. maybe allow nurseries and infant schools to return too. one can hope.
I'm going to guarantee you right now you'll be disappointed.
Future War Cultist wrote:I’m glad you raised that point. As an unashamed capitalist, I despise that crowd. There’s only one word to describe them; parasites. Capital, money, is the grease needed to keep the wheels turning. A consumer based economy only works when there’s plenty of consuming going on. Those who take all that money out of the system to hoard in their big pile, like Smaug with a heart condition, wreck it all. Without that money the whole thing grinds to a halt.
Wonder how many of these "remove lockdown" people wishing other people to die for their sake would be willing to die themselves. After all since you are happy for others to die for you you shouldn't have problem dying yourself as well?
They say that people have a right to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. Honestly I wonder if we can allow people to be this stupid to be in power and still survive as a civilization.
I am really depressed and right now. Plus I may have accidentally concussed myself from the I did.
It's OK to strongly disagree, but please do not make personal attacks. If you find yourself continuing to butt heads with one other user in particular, consider putting them on ignore if you cannot make your argument in a polite manner.
Also note, capitalism, politics, etc is not the topic of this thread... let's try to stick to coronavirus news, please. Thanks for your help in keeping this open everyone!
Fair play to MSNBC for, when quoting a lawmaker who refuses to wear essential medical equipment because it dishonored god, chose to use a photo of him wearing an arm brace.
.. fair play to them for maintaining the social distancing.
I was just saying the other day; the protests would be FAR more impactful if the protesters maintained social distancing. It would send a message of 'look, we are outside of lockdown but still able to maintain safe distance, we can be trusted with this responsibility' instead I think the protests only appeal to... I do not have a polite way of putting that. While driving others away.
tneva82 wrote: Wonder how many of these "remove lockdown" people wishing other people to die for their sake would be willing to die themselves. After all since you are happy for others to die for you you shouldn't have problem dying yourself as well?
Edited by RiTides
You realise the recovery rate for CV19 is about 97% right? furthermore, all evidence shows the peak has passed, consistently pretty much everywhere. and extended lockdown will cause deaths...
Future War Cultist wrote: Maybe unashamed capitalist isn’t the right term. Capitalist with a conscience?
na just capitalist.
the unashamed part i'd leave out. Because i also feel like you'd rather not want 19th century workers conditions now do you.
Not at all. But if we aren’t already back to that level we’re definitely sliding towards it though.
Nah, certain industries (Cough gaming) are in a toothing Phase and others have exploited loopholes to avoid taxes and are bragging about that until they get curbed in the Next crisis when the state needs money.
I know it's hard to divorce this issue from it, and we're also trying not to delete posts in this thread once there's been a lot of discussion on something (and thus lose context of what people were replying to).
But yes... not rebutting and just moving on to the non-political aspects of the pandemic that we can discuss here is very much appreciated!
We are so monumentally, horrendously screwed by stupidity here in the US. Seriously, I already had a somewhat low opinion of my fellow human beings, but I am even revising that previous thought.
I am a work tool and appliance delivery driver who has just got back to work after the shelter in place orders have been lifted partially, and everyone slammed back out into the public like nothing has even changed.
It might as well be May of 2019.
In the past three days of deliveries, I have been met by exactly ONE maintenance guy out of at least 30 properties all across my state who wore a mask, and he only remembered it because he saw me wearing mine. None of my shop wears even one piece of PPE, and they think that that masks are "stupid and pointless". Today they were all eating from a single communal pizza for lunch.
I have actually been scoffed and eye-rolled at by customers for wearing a mask, and even given unsolicited advise about how all of this is a hoax and barely anyone is REALLY getting sick. One guy said that yeah, he used to wear a mask, but it was too much of a pain to talk in, so he said in his words "Eff it, I'll either die or I won't". One of the guys has been in our shop every day to buy materials with no mask or anything, and is from an apartment complex maybe 1/8 of a mile away that he openly states has several confirmed resident cases.
Some of the properties I deliver to are even majority-senior housing, and it's like nothing is going on!
My mom and dad live next door to my wife and kids and I, and we had been sheltering in place together. Unfortunately, I have had to go back to quarantining my family from them, because Mom is going through cancer treatments and so is immune-comprimised. I figure I am so exposed at work that there is no reason to take the chance.
Sorry if it sounds like I am venting, but hey at least it's relevant and non-political!
Here it is a major claim that stores requiring such things is against our personal freedoms, when we have had "no shirt, no shoes, no service" for my entire life............
Yeah, it's not required here, just strongly encouraged. People are staying really far apart in the stores, though, and the cashiers often even have a clear plastic shield in front of them. So, hopefully the transmission risk is fairly low... but obviously it'd be even lower if everyone were wearing a mask.
Fair play to MSNBC for, when quoting a lawmaker who refuses to wear essential medical equipment because it dishonored god, chose to use a photo of him wearing an arm brace.
It's a clickbait story trying to gin up outrage over nothing.
The governor of Ohio already downgraded a requirment to a recommendation and he did it a week and a half ago. One state legislator trying to grab media attention by not complying with a voluntary recommendation to wear a mask in public isn't a threat to anyone or anything and doesn't strike me as news worthy at all.
From the article:
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, also a Republican, said on April 27 that wearing masks was one of the "essential tools" in fighting the spread of the coronavirus and ordered that shoppers wear them in stores at all times. "To not wear masks would be negligent and a mistake. We have to protect these employees," the governor wrote on Twitter.
But the next day, after receiving criticism, DeWine reversed the order.
"Though it is not a mandate, it is clearly in the best interest for Ohioans to wear a mask in retail settings. This gives added protection to others," DeWine said. "When I go out in public and go into a business, I will wear a mask. And, I have recommended to my family members that they wear masks."
In the article MSNBC also linked to an article that the state legislator wrote to the governor and then in the very next paragraph misattributed direct quotes from the letter to the governor, the person the letter was addressing (the governor did NOT write the letter). That is a basic failure of journalistic integrity and professionalism that makes MSNBC look pathetic. Again, the governor made wearing masks voluntary over a week ago, a single state legislaturor's noncompliance with it isn't newsworthy.
In the article it references that Ohio already planned to reopen in May.
In late April, DeWine ordered a partial reopening for Ohio that went into effect on May 1. On May 4, restrictions were lifted on construction, distribution, manufacturing and offices. And by May 12, consumer, retail and service businesses will be allowed to reopen.
Yet there is no mention in the article about any evidence that reopening is a bad idea, of any negative consequences appearing yet or when negative consequences might appear or what they'd be or how to evaluate if the reopening is a success or failure, etc. Nope, it's just an article giving an obscure state legislator who likes to post nutty conspiracy theories on Facebook and spin important issues into extremist and absolutist arguments some airtime and notoriety.
Ouze wrote: Hey, I was only giving them props for the photo selection.
True, I apologize if that came off like I was taking a shot at you, that wasn't my intent. It just bothers me when peopel get worked up over articles like that. I don't blame people for not taking precautions agains the virus seriously when so much of the media coverage isn't serious either. Even important national issues like our response to the pandemic gets turned into mindless fodder for clickbait outrage junk "journalism" instead trying to keep people informed with useful and valuable information.
I had to break Quarantine to go to the Grocery stores the other day. I got enough stuff for another 2-3 weeks.
At the only Wal-mart within 2 hours drive, I saw about 1 in 20 people wearing a face covering. Most people were in singles or couples only. It was better than I expected since my location is very rural, very Red, and not very hard hit at all.
I then went to a local grocery store and found about 1 in 50 people wearing a mask. Here there were family groups shopping and no regard for social distancing. in fact, I was looked at askance for following the CDC recommendations.
I look forward to when tourist season opens up in about three weeks...... :(
Prestor Jon wrote: The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment
And the $600 per week Federal addition to unemployment for people affected by the Covid situation. This includes self-employed people and people with partnerships.
Also, open economy is not the only solution. There is also the solution of 'Government steps in to help people pay for things' solution that involves less people dying...
You are correct and I would love to see our government produce legislation that is a rational, pragmatic response to helping our country, especially those suffering the most under this pandemic, the help they need in a timely manner. I just don't see that happening and I don't see it happening anytime soon. The Federal government could do more to help the states afford to pay out the unemployment benefits to 30,000,000+ people instead of just tacking on a few hundred dollars. States are already in difficult positions with their budgets and Congress doesn't seem eager to help. Why make people file for unemployment in the first place? Why couldnt we just send Federal money to either small businesses directly or as lump sums to states to administer to small business so they could just keep people on their payrolls and not fire them at all? We've all been conscripted into the safety effort for the greater good by the government but the government is doing very little to combat all the negative consequences of self quarrantining. If the government declared the lockdown and then refuses to help alleviate the burdens of the lockdown it's logical for people to push for the lockdown to end.
Easy E wrote: I had to break Quarantine to go to the Grocery stores the other day. I got enough stuff for another 2-3 weeks.
At the only Wal-mart within 2 hours drive, I saw about 1 in 20 people wearing a face covering. Most people were in singles or couples only. It was better than I expected since my location is very rural, very Red, and not very hard hit at all.
I then went to a local grocery store and found about 1 in 50 people wearing a mask. Here there were family groups shopping and no regard for social distancing. in fact, I was looked at askance for following the CDC recommendations.
I look forward to when tourist season opens up in about three weeks...... :(
There's allready a "Gas Gas Gas" meme on verified Covid cases.
Ain't looking great .
Prestor Jon wrote: The only Federal assistance sent to people was a one time $1200 payment
And the $600 per week Federal addition to unemployment for people affected by the Covid situation. This includes self-employed people and people with partnerships.
Also, open economy is not the only solution. There is also the solution of 'Government steps in to help people pay for things' solution that involves less people dying...
You are correct and I would love to see our government produce legislation that is a rational, pragmatic response to helping our country, especially those suffering the most under this pandemic, the help they need in a timely manner. I just don't see that happening and I don't see it happening anytime soon. The Federal government could do more to help the states afford to pay out the unemployment benefits to 30,000,000+ people instead of just tacking on a few hundred dollars. States are already in difficult positions with their budgets and Congress doesn't seem eager to help. Why make people file for unemployment in the first place? Why couldnt we just send Federal money to either small businesses directly or as lump sums to states to administer to small business so they could just keep people on their payrolls and not fire them at all? We've all been conscripted into the safety effort for the greater good by the government but the government is doing very little to combat all the negative consequences of self quarrantining. If the government declared the lockdown and then refuses to help alleviate the burdens of the lockdown it's logical for people to push for the lockdown to end.
Kilkrazy wrote: The latest Private Eye has a list of the big British companies owned by multi-millionaires who live in tax havens which are claiming a ton of money to furlough workers and so on.
Of course the government money is needed by those workers, it's just a pity the owners aren't paying into the system.
Interstingly, several countries have passed laws stating that companies who hide their money in offshore tax havens are not eligible for bailout funds. Poland and Denmark IIRC - and more power to them.
The Netherlands have in at least one case (KLM) demanded that a company pay out neither dividends nor bonuses to execs in order to be bailed out, and should have done so across the board IMO.
Kilkrazy wrote: The latest Private Eye has a list of the big British companies owned by multi-millionaires who live in tax havens which are claiming a ton of money to furlough workers and so on.
Of course the government money is needed by those workers, it's just a pity the owners aren't paying into the system.
Interstingly, several countries have passed laws stating that companies who hide their money in offshore tax havens are not eligible for bailout funds. Poland and Denmark IIRC - and more power to them.
The Netherlands have in at least one case (KLM) demanded that a company pay out neither dividends nor bonuses to execs in order to be bailed out, and should have done so across the board IMO.
Discussion over here of partially helping out the Swiss Airline are going on , sofar minimal conditions would be all money given would have to be used in switzerland.
As for money in offshore havens , well Like i said that behaviour will bite companies in the backside .
tneva82 wrote: Wonder how many of these "remove lockdown" people wishing other people to die for their sake would be willing to die themselves. After all since you are happy for others to die for you you shouldn't have problem dying yourself as well?
Edited by RiTides
To me that's one of the most sinister aspects of this virus. For the vast majority who catch it, they'll never even notice- so the odds are very good that these protestors will not be personally harmed by it. It's the core of their arguments, and it's accurate. The catch is over 2 weeks, they're likely to infect enough people to cause a death and several hospitalizations directly, or through the other carriers they create. But they'll never know if they were the one that infected the casualties, especially if they're asymptomatic. So there's no guilt, and little personal risk from spreading the virus, and exacerbating the pandemic.
What they know, is whether they catch it or not, the bills are coming- and if those aren't paid, their families won't eat, will lose their homes, and (at least in the US) health insurance- so it is inexplicably better to catch it now if they're going to, while they can afford the medical bills and have insurance to cover it.
It's a horrible, desperate situation for many. Breaking social distancing will kill thousands of anonymous strangers- but can you be in favor of it when your family will lose everything but their lives?
That's why so many states are opening up, and why our casualty rates are going to be so, so terrible. Our government will not take care of its citizens during this time- if we were paying people to stay home, or had canceled rent and mortgage payments for the duration, I doubt there'd be nearly as many protests going on here.
tneva82 wrote: Wonder how many of these "remove lockdown" people wishing other people to die for their sake would be willing to die themselves. After all since you are happy for others to die for you you shouldn't have problem dying yourself as well?
Edited by RiTides
To me that's one of the most sinister aspects of this virus. For the vast majority who catch it, they'll never even notice- so the odds are very good that these protestors will not be personally harmed by it. It's the core of their arguments, and it's accurate. The catch is over 2 weeks, they're likely to infect enough people to cause a death and several hospitalizations directly, or through the other carriers they create. But they'll never know if they were the one that infected the casualties, especially if they're asymptomatic. So there's no guilt, and little personal risk from spreading the virus, and exacerbating the pandemic.
What they know, is whether they catch it or not, the bills are coming- and if those aren't paid, their families won't eat, will lose their homes, and (at least in the US) health insurance- so it is inexplicably better to catch it now if they're going to, while they can afford the medical bills and have insurance to cover it.
It's a horrible, desperate situation for many. Breaking social distancing will kill thousands of anonymous strangers- but can you be in favor of it when your family will lose everything but their lives?
That's why so many states are opening up, and why our casualty rates are going to be so, so terrible. Our government will not take care of its citizens during this time- if we were paying people to stay home, or had canceled rent and mortgage payments for the duration, I doubt there'd be nearly as many protests going on here.
I agree with everything you said.
I think two other important components to the problem are the lack of testing and lack of information. It’s perfectly rational to want to return to normal behaviors if you feel normal. We’ve been self quarantining for a month and a half now and if you feel healthy at this point you probably believe you don’t aren’t infected so why not go out? There isn’t testing available for asymptomatic people so people that honestly believe they are healthy can’t be sure whether or not they’re putting others at risk. It’s crazy that we’re opening back up with no widespread testing. What is different from when the lockdown started? Why is it safe now if it wasn’t then? And if we can’t safely end the lockdown without testing and we don’t know when we’ll have widespread testing how can we keep everyone locked down indefinitely?
We don’t seem to have a comprehensive plan. Coupled with that we don’t have good information. We can’t tell who has it or has had it unless they’re actively sick. We’re not sure what treatments are effective, how many strains of the virus are out there or if people can get infected more than once. Some research has been done on some states in regards to how widespread the virus has been. We know there’s been more cases than just the confirmed ones but we’ll never get an accurate count. That ties back into not knowing if you are infected or have been infected if you were asymptomatic. It’s a very confusing and anxious situation.
AegisGrimm wrote: We are so monumentally, horrendously screwed by stupidity here in the US. Seriously, I already had a somewhat low opinion of my fellow human beings, but I am even revising that previous thought.
I am a work tool and appliance delivery driver who has just got back to work after the shelter in place orders have been lifted partially, and everyone slammed back out into the public like nothing has even changed.
It might as well be May of 2019.
In the past three days of deliveries, I have been met by exactly ONE maintenance guy out of at least 30 properties all across my state who wore a mask, and he only remembered it because he saw me wearing mine. None of my shop wears even one piece of PPE, and they think that that masks are "stupid and pointless". Today they were all eating from a single communal pizza for lunch.
I have actually been scoffed and eye-rolled at by customers for wearing a mask, and even given unsolicited advise about how all of this is a hoax and barely anyone is REALLY getting sick. One guy said that yeah, he used to wear a mask, but it was too much of a pain to talk in, so he said in his words "Eff it, I'll either die or I won't". One of the guys has been in our shop every day to buy materials with no mask or anything, and is from an apartment complex maybe 1/8 of a mile away that he openly states has several confirmed resident cases.
Some of the properties I deliver to are even majority-senior housing, and it's like nothing is going on!
My mom and dad live next door to my wife and kids and I, and we had been sheltering in place together. Unfortunately, I have had to go back to quarantining my family from them, because Mom is going through cancer treatments and so is immune-comprimised. I figure I am so exposed at work that there is no reason to take the chance.
Sorry if it sounds like I am venting, but hey at least it's relevant and non-political!
Wow, how different things are by state. Here in San Diego it is very much the opposite. Mask requirement started in May, but I would say 80% of people (and all workers) were already wearing masks anyways. People are going out of their way to maintain distance, barely any traffic on the roads, pretty much completely inverted.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Wow, how different things are by state. Here in San Diego it is very much the opposite. Mask requirement started in May, but I would say 80% of people (and all workers) were already wearing masks anyways. People are going out of their way to maintain distance, barely any traffic on the roads, pretty much completely inverted.
The low traffic on the roads is fantastic. I can ride the murdercycle to work and not dodge idiots the whole way in. Since I've been working late any 'rush hour' traffic is gone by the ride home.
It is already next to impossible to talk about this pandemic and not have politics intrude to some extent now - and it will be impossible to talk about this pandemic and the situation in the USA going forward, because the USA (and really, every country) is handling the response in a very political manner.
I think people are trying to discuss this fact in as general terms as possible though?
Having said that, if a post intrudes upon a Rule, report and just move the feth on - weird nonsensical posts that are essentially breaking another rule on the site is a strange thing to see.
I guess it is entertaining though, and certainly better then Murder Hornets.
Meanwhile, the whole reopening thing isn't working out as intended, as many of these states are now seeing a sharp increase in cases...
Maybe we're at the point where the moral and economic calculus says "This is it" but it does seem a little cold and brutal.
I think ANY reopening, no matter how long you wait to initiate it, is going to see a sharp increase in cases. As long as the virus is still out there, once people start leaving their houses and interacting, you are going to see more transmissions.
No doubt, which is why the key to reopening is a good, robust testing system, that includes the ability to contact trace.
Sadly, I don't think we're anywhere close to where we need to be here in the USA in that regard.
It feels like we'll be stuck in some awful groundhog day of numbers go down, reopen, numbers go up, shutdown, rinse repeat until we get more effective treatments, a working vaccine, etc.
I think two other important components to the problem are the lack of testing and lack of information. It’s perfectly rational to want to return to normal behaviors if you feel normal. We’ve been self quarantining for a month and a half now and if you feel healthy at this point you probably believe you don’t aren’t infected so why not go out? There isn’t testing available for asymptomatic people so people that honestly believe they are healthy can’t be sure whether or not they’re putting others at risk. It’s crazy that we’re opening back up with no widespread testing. What is different from when the lockdown started? Why is it safe now if it wasn’t then? And if we can’t safely end the lockdown without testing and we don’t know when we’ll have widespread testing how can we keep everyone locked down indefinitely?
We don’t seem to have a comprehensive plan. Coupled with that we don’t have good information. We can’t tell who has it or has had it unless they’re actively sick. We’re not sure what treatments are effective, how many strains of the virus are out there or if people can get infected more than once. Some research has been done on some states in regards to how widespread the virus has been. We know there’s been more cases than just the confirmed ones but we’ll never get an accurate count. That ties back into not knowing if you are infected or have been infected if you were asymptomatic. It’s a very confusing and anxious situation.
Yes, well said. that has been one of the most frustrating parts about this for me - that this has been going on since January and we've gone from pretending there wasn't a problem to admitting there was maybe a small problem (but under control) to finally admitting yeah it's a problem but will be over soon and then... marching into now pretending the problem has passed, or is just about passed. At no point was there any kind of national plan or leadership or just... anything you would expect in a first world country. It's May and we still aren't anywhere near where we should be with testing and no real plan to get there. I hear about states being forced to bid against each other for PPE for their front line healthcare workers and I get so angry; how did we get here?
Instead of people being ready to riot over that, we have them opening up the beaches and tattoo parlors and hair styling places. In some cases this is a thinly veiled excuse to kick people off unemployment - hell, in at least one state, their unemployment system was broken by design. In another state, you have the governor admitting opening early will get more people sick (and die) but you know, the economy. In another state, it looks like judges might overrule the governor's stay-at-home order (while they themselves, obviously, are working remotely).
Finally we have protests. And what are the protests for? Not these abjectly broken pieces of government, at our rudderless direction, or what is now the equivalent of about 19 9/11s and who knows how much of it could have been avoided.... but instead to astroturf for billionaire profits. At least with 9/11 we united, instead of further fracturing.
Against all of this, the vague, never-ending backdrop that if you get it, you just might die! All the time, in the back of your head. Sure, you might die at any time, people get hit by cars and have strokes in their sleep and so on, but this is just a never ending, creeping doom. It's like a film on the water, always psychologically there. Maybe your grandma or your parents if not you. Maybe your sister who is a smoker. I rarely sleep more than 4 or 5 hours a night now, even on my days off, and am always tired.
This has not been a very cash money time, is I guess what i am saying.
CptJake wrote: The low traffic on the roads is fantastic. I can ride the murdercycle to work and not dodge idiots the whole way in. Since I've been working late any 'rush hour' traffic is gone by the ride home.
A few days ago, on the way to my federally essential job, I could see for literally miles that there was no traffic and that is becoming semi-normal. It made for a nice commute but I also speed substantially more than I already do. So, not 100% perfect.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Wow, how different things are by state. Here in San Diego it is very much the opposite. Mask requirement started in May, but I would say 80% of people (and all workers) were already wearing masks anyways. People are going out of their way to maintain distance, barely any traffic on the roads, pretty much completely inverted.
The low traffic on the roads is fantastic. I can ride the murdercycle to work and not dodge idiots the whole way in. Since I've been working late any 'rush hour' traffic is gone by the ride home.
I would say here in Michigan, it's down maybe 25% this week from pre-pandemic traffic- MAYBE. A big enough drop as things open back up that you still notice the larger than normal difference of semi-trucks to civilian traffic, but not by much.
Definitely a big difference up from the previous weeks where I drove to a couple of stores and traffic was way, way down as people stayed home. I am a delivery driver, and have probably driven about 300-400 miles on all possible road types in my three days back from work since the lockdown, across a pretty big area to the north and southeast of where I am at home right now, so i have seen a pretty good sampling.
I think the increase in infection is going to be pretty huge by the end of next week. Enough people think that things should just be perfectly business as usual that I have had a couple of delivery recipients be pretty butthurt that my company is no longer delivering appliances into apartment buildings, but just to the front entry and the maintenance guys on-site actually have to do some muscle work to get it from there. They just have no idea why I don't want to go into a stranger's living space when I am probably getting paid less than they are. Even at assisted living apartments I was met by staff with no mask or gloves on.
Three days into the first post-lockdown week and already people treat this like the pandemic was something that happened a year ago and we are all reminiscing about how much things sucked "back during the lockdown".
I would say traffic is down 75% or so around me. I will also note that things are not completely shut down--people are getting take-out, drive-thrus are full, businessess still open have foot traffic. But it is all done with masks and six feet apart. There is no question that people around me are generally taking the matter seriously, even if they don't like it.
I think two other important components to the problem are the lack of testing and lack of information. It’s perfectly rational to want to return to normal behaviors if you feel normal. We’ve been self quarantining for a month and a half now and if you feel healthy at this point you probably believe you don’t aren’t infected so why not go out? There isn’t testing available for asymptomatic people so people that honestly believe they are healthy can’t be sure whether or not they’re putting others at risk. It’s crazy that we’re opening back up with no widespread testing. What is different from when the lockdown started? Why is it safe now if it wasn’t then? And if we can’t safely end the lockdown without testing and we don’t know when we’ll have widespread testing how can we keep everyone locked down indefinitely?
We don’t seem to have a comprehensive plan. Coupled with that we don’t have good information. We can’t tell who has it or has had it unless they’re actively sick. We’re not sure what treatments are effective, how many strains of the virus are out there or if people can get infected more than once. Some research has been done on some states in regards to how widespread the virus has been. We know there’s been more cases than just the confirmed ones but we’ll never get an accurate count. That ties back into not knowing if you are infected or have been infected if you were asymptomatic. It’s a very confusing and anxious situation.
Yes, well said. that has been one of the most frustrating parts about this for me - that this has been going on since January and we've gone from pretending there wasn't a problem to admitting there was maybe a small problem (but under control) to finally admitting yeah it's a problem but will be over soon and then... marching into now pretending the problem has passed, or is just about passed. At no point was there any kind of national plan or leadership or just... anything you would expect in a first world country. It's May and we still aren't anywhere near where we should be with testing and no real plan to get there. I hear about states being forced to bid against each other for PPE for their front line healthcare workers and I get so angry; how did we get here?
Instead of people being ready to riot over that, we have them opening up the beaches and tattoo parlors and hair styling places. In some cases this is a thinly veiled excuse to kick people off unemployment - hell, in at least one state, their unemployment system was broken by design. In another state, you have the governor admitting opening early will get more people sick (and die) but you know, the economy. In another state, it looks like judges might overrule the governor's stay-at-home order (while they themselves, obviously, are working remotely).
Finally we have protests. And what are the protests for? Not these abjectly broken pieces of government, at our rudderless direction, or what is now the equivalent of about 19 9/11s and who knows how much of it could have been avoided.... but instead to astroturf for billionaire profits. At least with 9/11 we united, instead of further fracturing.
Against all of this, the vague, never-ending backdrop that if you get it, you just might die! All the time, in the back of your head. Sure, you might die at any time, people get hit by cars and have strokes in their sleep and so on, but this is just a never ending, creeping doom. It's like a film on the water, always psychologically there. Maybe your grandma or your parents if not you. Maybe your sister who is a smoker. I rarely sleep more than 4 or 5 hours a night now, even on my days off, and am always tired.
This has not been a very cash money time, is I guess what i am saying.
CptJake wrote: The low traffic on the roads is fantastic. I can ride the murdercycle to work and not dodge idiots the whole way in. Since I've been working late any 'rush hour' traffic is gone by the ride home.
A few days ago, on the way to my federally essential job, I could see for literally miles that there was no traffic and that is becoming semi-normal. It made for a nice commute but I also speed substantially more than I already do. So, not 100% perfect.
I can relate to the anxiety keeping you from sleeping. Please be mindful of your speed if you’re not getting good rest, the lead foot impulse of an open road is strong but the absence of other traffic isn’t a guarantee against accidents especially if you’re sleep deprived.
I try to stay positive because within our little bubble of the neighborhood and family everything is going well even with my wife’s job as a nurse. However every time I look at the bigger picture and see how we’re literally making stuff up as we go along with no real plans or preparation I get real worried about things getting worse.
Apparently in an effort to take a bad situation and make it even more terrifying, Georgia and Wisconsin are letting teenagers loose on the road without needing to pass a road test as long as their parents give permission.
Azreal13 wrote: Apparently in an effort to take a bad situation and make it even more terrifying, Georgia and Wisconsin are letting teenagers loose on the road without needing to pass a road test as long as their parents give permission.
So if the virus doesn't get you, an inexperienced driver might!
Wisconsin seems to be handling the situation more thoughtfully than Georgia.
Teens won’t be required to skip a road test, however; they’ll be able to take tests in person again on May 26, when Wisconsin’s current stay-at-home order ends.
And at least most of the teens would have passed the test anyway.
98% of teens pass a road test on their first or second attempt, the Wisconsin DMV says; the agency hopes this waiver will make a dent in its 16,000 road test backlog. 10,000 of those tests will be eligible for a waiver.
That still means that statistically 200 people will be in charge of a vehicle that probably shouldn't be yet.
But frankly its probably less scary than it appears from a UK perspective where our population density and congested road network, as well as our propensity for manual transmission cars, makes the thought of allowing drivers with only half a licence (you have both a theoretical and practical exam to pass over here, not sure if that's mirrored) out on their own (not to mention eligible to travel the motorway/interstate network,) is terrifying.
Azreal13 wrote: That still means that statistically 200 people will be in charge of a vehicle that probably shouldn't be yet.
But frankly its probably less scary than it appears from a UK perspective where our population density and congested road network, as well as our propensity for manual transmission cars, makes the thought of allowing drivers with only half a licence (you have both a theoretical and practical exam to pass over here, not sure if that's mirrored) out on their own (not to mention eligible to travel the motorway/interstate network,) is terrifying.
True. It also would t surprise me if the need to clear the backlog and issue tens of thousands of teens their DL which is typically the only govt issues photo ID people have or carry is more of an impetus than letting teens drive. Few people are driving anywhere these days.
France has provided fairly compelling evidence that the covid infections were present in the icu patients thought at the time to be influenza like, but negative for influenze, from december.
Samples taken at admission are kept in freezer there, and PCR identification of a covid strain was foudn in 14/58 (or 59? A friend read this to me over the phone, so I didn't write it down) of the patients.
Clinical features of hemoptysis (That's coughing up blood for you lay folk) and radiologic signs like "ground glass lower lung fields") were shown in some of this. Community strain was postulated from careful trace analysis of the patients. Note that some lived and some died, back then, among the patients they looked into.
Azreal13 wrote: That still means that statistically 200 people will be in charge of a vehicle that probably shouldn't be yet.
True, but there are plenty of people who have passed driving tests who definitely shouldn't be on the road. Be it because they're irresponsible teens or old people with failing mind and body.
So it seems that the PPE shipment that the UK Gov made a big deal about acquiring from Turkey in one of there daily briefings, was after everything else(didn't arrive on time even after sending the RAF to collect it) not up to the required NHS standards https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52569364
Wait I'm confused. How is it a difficult call?
This seems like a wildly bad idea to me.
But then again, I think teenage driving is a bad idea in general.
CptJake wrote: I think ANY reopening, no matter how long you wait to initiate it, is going to see a sharp increase in cases. As long as the virus is still out there, once people start leaving their houses and interacting, you are going to see more transmissions.
We have Started reopening some days ago specific buissness that is, and have not yet recived an uptick.
Make it or break it will be May 11. Then all Shops and Restaurant s will reopen with conditions of course.
CptJake wrote: I think ANY reopening, no matter how long you wait to initiate it, is going to see a sharp increase in cases. As long as the virus is still out there, once people start leaving their houses and interacting, you are going to see more transmissions.
We have Started reopening some days ago specific buissness that is, and have not yet recived an uptick.
It takes ca.14 days to register a bit and probably minimum three weeks to really know if there's been much of an effect. Not saying you're definitely getting one, but if you were you could not know it yet.
CptJake wrote: I think ANY reopening, no matter how long you wait to initiate it, is going to see a sharp increase in cases. As long as the virus is still out there, once people start leaving their houses and interacting, you are going to see more transmissions.
We have Started reopening some days ago specific buissness that is, and have not yet recived an uptick.
It takes ca.14 days to register.
aye which is why the next step is on 11.th.
I am carefully optimistic for the first step not much is happening, however the step at 11. will be bigger, i do hope that with enforced standards and cooperation that it will not just grow exponentially but i have a feeling that this ain't happenening.
Also what was that last page with the french influenza cases?
UK gov still implying a change on Sunday but refusing to clarify anything, meaning the papers are filling the void with speculation so they have something to print before Monday. As such, we have print media, which people pay more attention to than government announcements, telling everyone that it's a free for all from Monday and you're welcome to go hang out with your pals.
The actual announcement will be a very subtle change, but I'll bet parks and streets are busy next week regardless.
Easing restrictions does not mean we must go out.
I expect to stay at home after the relaxing. WFH and limited trips makes sense until the vaccine appears. Luckily, I can, so I probably will.
Ouze wrote: I hear about states being forced to bid against each other for PPE for their front line healthcare workers and I get so angry; how did we get here?
It gets worse seeing as a lot of PPE ordered by the states has been intercepted by the federal government and seized with no warning.
Skinnereal wrote: Easing restrictions does not mean we must go out.
I expect to stay at home after the relaxing.
So do I, but the press is pushing the 'FREEDOM!' angle hard and people pay attention to them. Star, Mail, Mirror, Express, Sun, Telegraph, and i all have variations on that theme as front page headlines today. All bar the i and Telegraph also have a celebrity losing weight taking up the rest of the front page. 30,000 dead only makes the cover of the Metro.
Skinnereal wrote: Easing restrictions does not mean we must go out.
I expect to stay at home after the relaxing. WFH and limited trips makes sense until the vaccine appears. Luckily, I can, so I probably will.
*if
A vaccine appears. considering the successes(or lack thereof) of vaccinations against the 6 other Coronavirus, I'm not banking on it. I believe it will eventually become endemic
Something people seem to have missed with the talk of easing restrictions in the UK is the timescale. The PM has said he will make an announcement on Sunday. This 4 days on from when the lock down measures must be legally reviewed. This says to me the lock down will be extended for another 3 weeks but with some minor easements to be announced. The PM Stated following his address on Sunday he hoped that changes to our lock down could begin as soon as the next day. No business can react that quickly so this tells me the easing will be mostly social measures. My best guess would be lifting the restrictions on the use of parks (not playgrounds), travel to outdoor tourist attractions such as national parks, and being able to see close family members. Expect social distancing to remain. Anything business based is likely to follow in the weeks after and will allow premises which can control there operations easily to reopen. Salons who can operate by appointment only and with one customer at a time. Garden centres which are predominantly outside and can introduce social distancing measures relatively easily. We can expect to see detailed guidance on how these retailers should operate and fines for those who don't follow them. Retailers who can carry out there business online with little difference to a traditional shop experience will probably stay shut (clothing and electronic retailers). Other sectors such as bars, restaurants and clubs will not want to open with social distancing a requirement as there overheads would make opening more expensive than staying shut
squilverine wrote: Something people seem to have missed with the talk of easing restrictions in the UK is the timescale [snip]
I'm not sure who is missing any of that? I think that's pretty universally known to be the case. A general softening of social distancing. I would expect some movement of some businesses, however, as giving information on a Sunday to allow for businesses to be aware for the start of the working week is Johnson's only defence for making a public announcement before informing the house.
There will be a surge to parks and a stack of parties the following weekend.
Skinnereal wrote: Easing restrictions does not mean we must go out.
I expect to stay at home after the relaxing. WFH and limited trips makes sense until the vaccine appears. Luckily, I can, so I probably will.
Yeah the economy won't be going blooming just because goverment removes restrictions as people will still be worried and avoid it(sensible).
As it is it's more of removing need for goverment and insurance companies to pay compensation. You aren't forbidden to stay open. If nobody just comes tough luck. That's business
Ouze wrote: I hear about states being forced to bid against each other for PPE for their front line healthcare workers and I get so angry; how did we get here?
It gets worse seeing as a lot of PPE ordered by the states has been intercepted by the federal government and seized with no warning.
And that after been told it's job of state to buy supplies, not for federal govemrent to give them
Ouze wrote: I hear about states being forced to bid against each other for PPE for their front line healthcare workers and I get so angry; how did we get here?
It gets worse seeing as a lot of PPE ordered by the states has been intercepted by the federal government and seized with no warning.
And a lot of the PPE the UK Gov has bought isn't any good - BBC.
squilverine wrote: Something people seem to have missed with the talk of easing restrictions in the UK is the timescale [snip]
I'm not sure who is missing any of that? I think that's pretty universally known to be the case. A general softening of social distancing. I would expect some movement of some businesses, however, as giving information on a Sunday to allow for businesses to be aware for the start of the working week is Johnson's only defence for making a public announcement before informing the house.
There will be a surge to parks and a stack of parties the following weekend.
What I meant is I feel people are concentrating on which shops/businesses will open and maybe missing the practicalities involved. Currently there is no guidance for how non essential retailers will operate. Yes we can make educated guesses but as I said there are likely to be strict guidelines which will require time for businesses to implement. That's what led me to my belief that any announcements on Sunday regarding easements will be social measures not necessarily business. People are missing that point. There are huge amounts of people, spurred on by false information and wishful thinking, who somehow believe the entire lock down will be lifted on Monday. Regardless of which measures are or aren't adapted people will flout them as they have with the ones in place now. I would imagine this is taken into account when considering which restrictions to lift.
I think you are quite right we will see a big surge in use of recreational spaces and gatherings of all sorts, however this will Peter out once the novelty of seeing people has work off
tneva82 wrote: And in news that surprise exactly nobody. After germany eased up restrictions there's surge of new cases.
Surprise surprise not. The obvious inevitable happened.
Got a source for that? Doesn't seem like there's been enough time since the easing of restrictions to come to that conclusion. We'll only really get a sense of the impact of lifting restrictions about two weeks from now, which is why I think the UK government might be better waiting to see what happens in places like Italy and Germany before making a decision.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’ve been hearing a few people saying that a vaccine may never come. I really hope that isn’t the case because if so, then what?
It becomes endemic, and we have to live with it, but this requires at least some build up of immunity in the population to keep the R0 at around 1.
Had to walk through my local shopping centre for banking purposes, and noted allot of closed shops have shelves with stock on that wasn't there before or people stocking shelves or notices indicating a return come Monday.
Some shops have relaxed allot of customer limits too and twice as many were in the food and drug stores.
Also allot more people waiting in the bus station than normally.
Allot of excitement for Monday.
So start expecting cases and deaths to rise again... Well... Deaths at least since we don't bother testing until you're a corpse...
Oh and with KFC nearby opening up the roads are clogged for hours
Future War Cultist wrote: I’ve been hearing a few people saying that a vaccine may never come. I really hope that isn’t the case because if so, then what?
Track and trace and isolate becomes the only viable solution. Focusing resources on testing the population to the point where you can basically isolate the infected until the virus runs its course and is no longer infectious. Repeating that for every single outbreak until you've got it under control to the point where there are no more outbreaks.
The problems there are un-monitored segments of the population where it could hide and migration of people from outside into the country. Through both official and unofficial channels. You'd have to screen people on flights and ships and likely have to require people to be tested before trips both in and out of the country.
Such a system only works now if the whole world gets involved, which would mean once developed countries complete their testing phase, they'd have to then supply tests and medical resources to poorer nations; likely focusing on top holiday destinations first and then filtering down from there.
The only reason that isn't practical right at the start is because the populations around the world are so mobile that by the itme we've got to the point where we've enough kits and infrastructure to properly start testing - the population has already moved and spread the virus around.
The risk with this approach is that once you start to relax you can get infection spikes strike up anywhere. The other risk is that a country manages to contain things really really well so the majority of the population isn't exposed, but then travel to/from other countries brings the virus in and it slips past testing at the point of arrival/departure and enters the population that way.
Of course the other approach is herd immunity. Letting the virus burn through the population at a slow steady rate (multiple lockdowns and relaxes) so that in the end the majority have been exposed and are no longer cable of being infected and incapacitated. Of course this runs a risk of a higher death rate. Even if you keep numbers below capacity for hospitals it means exposing more vulnerable people in the population. It is potentially faster than some of the other approaches or more reliable.
Track and trace can work; however you need a proper system in place and many countries just don't have it. Plus there are rights issues with regard to tracking your population on such a high level that many nations might not agree with. Meanwhile many poorer nations might well lack things like an effective mobile phone network through a majority of its population to allow for a proper track and trace to even function.
German cases did leap up end of April/start of this month but it's too early to be related to lockdown easing and their overall trend is still downward.
Well, we can hope that it will mutate into a somewhat less lethal strain, in order to keep propagating as people develop immunity. in that case it would become similar to the flu(in terms of how it appears, before anyone murders me with 'its not the flu!'), likely with seasonal spikes due to immune responses, but considering that most healthy people pass through it relatively unharmed, this may not happen. this is what is usually meant by the 'herd immunity' approach. this phrase generates controversy right now, even though it should be at least factored into any strategy. the more healthy people who can contract it, recover and develop immunity should decrease the R0. there are risks of course, but compared to the other options, it doesnt seem a massive stretch worse to me. Corona virus(in general terms) immunity does seem to be short lived, but exposure does seem to at least leave the body better prepared even if immune antibodies do disappear over time.
Mutation in the positive direction toward a less lethal strain is what we'd all hope would happen. Of course mutation is not a perfect process and it could just as easily become more benign as it could become more lethal. Also don't forget many who die from it aren't dying from Corona directly; its other sickness that gets them at the same time.
So even if Corona becomes "less deadly" it might still have a high death rate due to associated sickness.
Indeed something like a safer pneumonia inoculation could be a bigger life saver. I'm given to understand that the current pneumonia jab has long term side effects, hence why its only provided to the aged where those long term effects are basically not considered a high risk.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’ve been hearing a few people saying that a vaccine may never come. I really hope that isn’t the case because if so, then what?
Track and trace and isolate becomes the only viable solution. Focusing resources on testing the population to the point where you can basically isolate the infected until the virus runs its course and is no longer infectious. Repeating that for every single outbreak until you've got it under control to the point where there are no more outbreaks.
And you think humans will do that forever until humans are extinct(or somebody comes with vaccine after all).
If there's no vaccine then humans will simply have to learn with it like influenza etc. It will be another disease that will spread time to time between humans killing some, causing damage to others etc. Average life span will likely drop but track, trace and generation after generation? Nope not working.
Herd immunity idea is pipe dream. That hasn't happened before without vaccine and so far tests don't show at all good idea for that. Only tiny miniscule amount of people are tested with any form of immunity and how strong that is...Other corona viruses don't give permanent immunity anyway.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’ve been hearing a few people saying that a vaccine may never come. I really hope that isn’t the case because if so, then what?
Track and trace and isolate becomes the only viable solution. Focusing resources on testing the population to the point where you can basically isolate the infected until the virus runs its course and is no longer infectious. Repeating that for every single outbreak until you've got it under control to the point where there are no more outbreaks.
And you think humans will do that forever until humans are extinct(or somebody comes with vaccine after all).
If there's no vaccine then humans will simply have to learn with it like influenza etc. It will be another disease that will spread time to time between humans killing some, causing damage to others etc. Average life span will likely drop but track, trace and generation after generation? Nope not working.
Herd immunity idea is pipe dream. That hasn't happened before without vaccine and so far tests don't show at all good idea for that. Only tiny miniscule amount of people are tested with any form of immunity and how strong that is...Other corona viruses don't give permanent immunity anyway.
Are you going to post your source or sources on your claims over Germany or are you just wasting everyone’s time?
Analysis of the data is mixed. Germany relaxed restrictions 2 weeks ago ( https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/germany-relaxes-virus-rules-fallback-clause-70535448 ), so there should be the initial surge of new cases happening- but daily new cases still looks relatively low (1155, as opposed to their peak of 6933). It will be very interesting to see if this indicates a true increase in the curve, or if it is just one of the fluctuations that happen in the graph historically.
Weirdly though, the daily death total spiked quite high- 282, which is pretty close to their darkest days 333. I don't understand why that would be the case.
I'm not trying to support or oppose the Germany claim, but I'm hoping their situation will help us know what to expect as the USA opens up.
Black people in UK 'twice as likely to die' from Covid-19
Robert Cuffe
BBC head of statistics
Black men and women are nearly twice as likely to die with Covid-19 as their white counterparts, according to new analysis from the Office for National Statistics.
The analysis combines data on Covid-19 deaths with information on ethnicity from the 2011 Census.
It takes account of age, where people live and some measures of deprivation, disadvantage and health. After adjusting for all these factors, black men and women were 90% more likely to die with Covid-19 than white people.
Men and women from Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities were also at higher risk than white people, though not by as much with the data showing their increased risk was between 30- 80%.
But an analysis based on the census data cannot fully explain the reasons for the higher risk because it does not take into account people’s current health, if they are in more crowded living conditions, are exposed to the virus through front-line roles - or other differences between communities that can increase risk.
from the BBC, the statisticians have now been able to crunch the number over what had been apparent at an anecdotal level and strip out a lot (but not all) of the variables that might effect things and black and some other ethnic minorities do seem to die at much higher rates than white sufferers (and chinese seem do die at a lower rate although the stats aren't as clear)
now this is based on data from the 2011 census so they haven't been able to remove heath effects that developed in the last 9 years such as heart attacks, becoming diabetic etc (and black people do suffer more from those) so expect the numbers to come closer together, but it still looks likely to me that there is probably a real biological effect too
I once heard Russia described as a gangster kleptocracy. At this point it wouldn't be surprising if Putin walks around cabinet meetings with a baseball bat.
right now. Plus I may have accidentally concussed myself from the 
