Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Marxist artist wrote:
Those pesky spring breakers.

I predict the next panic buy alcohol as pubs are closed!

Eh I dunno the supermarkets were still very well stocked with Alcohol last I saw. Didn't seem there was any run on it.

Though vodka might vanish as the advice seems to be doing the rounds that you can use it as an antiseptic wipe instead of soaps.

Here we've been told that you need minimum 60% alcohol to kill the bloody thing. Mass produced vodka as well as other non bootleg drinks rarely go above 40%.

 Overread wrote:

Marxist artist wrote:
Those pesky spring breakers.

I predict the next panic buy alcohol as pubs are closed!

Eh I dunno the supermarkets were still very well stocked with Alcohol last I saw. Didn't seem there was any run on it.

In a Waitrose tonight - Plenty of wine and ale left, but all the lager's gone along with the loo roll.

If we die of this thing, the Brits are going out pissed with clean arses.

 Galas wrote:
Someday I'll find someone that will be able to explain to me why the US health system is better than most european ones.

Or at minimun, is a functional health system. I'm still waiting for that day.

That really sucks Bob. I hope you'll pass this without bigger problems.

All I can say is this. Ten years ago, if I had a medical problem, I would call my mother who is a nurse and ask who the best doctor in my area was to go and see. She would tell me, and I would call them up. Usually I could up their office, head over within 7-10 days (sooner if it was more serious) and be seen, prescribed and on my way. Then one day there was this new law that was passed, the law that is commonly known as Obama Care. Ever since the passage of that law my ability to get treatment, the cost of my medications, my ability to even bee seen in a timely manner has gone from acceptable to nearly unusable. My insurance costs skyrocketed to much that I had to change providers a total of three times in a 4 year period just to keep costs manageable. My average wait time to be seen for medical help in the last two years has figured out to around 20 days.

 Sqorgar wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
--> You have no idea about the consequences yet.

Technically, nobody does. And the WHO doesn't have the best track record for predictions.

So what's your alternative? You keep going on and on about how experts are wrong some of the time without offering any kind of decent alyernative beyond "listen to me, I've read some stuff".

But here is what has happened. My sister lost her job as a bartender and has moved back in with my parents. My in-laws' retirement fund has lost half a million dollars. They were going to retire on April 1st. Now they can't. A local pizza joint that has been a staple of my city for as long as I've been alive (seriously, I had my 8th birthday party there) has posted a sign that says if they close for the virus, they won't be able to reopen. My social circle is relatively small - these aren't isolated cases. It's hitting others far worse. And there hasn't even been a lockdown yet.

My state (Florida) doesn't have a state income tax, and several others like estate tax or inheritance tax. The reason for this is because that deficit is made up in sales tax from the truly absurd number of tourists we get every year. With Disney World and Spring Break closed, and the Miami cruise ecosystem dead, the devastation, not just to the local economies of places like Panama City Beach or Orlando, but to the funding of the entire state will be incalculable. This is money that is used to fund schools, sanitation, health, elder care, women's shelters, transportation, and so on. This has the potential to change the entire landscape of Florida, and not in a good way.

That sucks, but it's more a scathing inditement against unregulated capitalism and, as a state, putting all your eggs in basket, than an argument to do nothing in the face of a pandemic - or even a potential pandemic.

It's not the market that I'm worried about. Ultimately, I'm worried about society turning into the open of The Last of Us, where we have to display out certificates of travel to be able to move about the city (like the currently use in China, and France) and have quantum barcode tattoos delivered through vaccinations. I don't want an end to encryption on the internet. Basically, if it comes out of a page from Brave New World or 1984, I'm rather against it.

I'm sorry, what? This is heading into straight-up conspiracy theory tin fgoil hat stuff here.

First of all, the New Deal was a sweeping change made during a depression that essentially rewrote American government to move from states rights to a more powerful, centralized federal government. Do you know who the president is right now? Do you think Trump is capable of doing something like the New Deal, or even Biden? They ain't no FDR.

Point. But then again, you reap what you sow - he was elected president. And that's the end of this one, lest the thread gets locked.

Second, you keep coming back to this money thing. I don't care about money. But we live in a capitalist society, and that means that money is how we operate. You want to eat, you exchange money for food. If you don't have money, you don't have food (we lost the ability to hunt and gather a long, long time ago). More practically, when the government doesn't have money, things like school lunches will be the first things lost. Welfare programs, social security, and so on. Programs to build giant solar panel farms to offset the overuse of fossil fuels. Hiring enough inspectors to check the conditions of all the offshore drilling platforms. Child services to help and support children in the foster care system. Hiring enough police officers to face down the crime wave that immediately follows an increase in poverty.

Shutting down the US for an extended period of time won't hurt my wallet. But it will essentially be the end of socialist policies in America. A large portion of our infrastructure will probably be bought up by corporations for pennies on the dollar, and do you think they are going to pick up the slack on welfare? Detroit shouldn't be the model for the rest of the US. People will die, destitute and sick. A lot more people than the coronavirus will be able to kill.

Or you could, I dunno, actually improve the things that literally just proved to be non-functional in your society.

I do not know why this keeps coming back to money for you. You think that if people don't have money that everything else will be the same? A few people losing their saving, sure. But a recession, or even a depression? Holy feth, read a history book.
I am very explicitly against tyrannical systems, as I mentioned above. You think a collapse of our society is going to reduce the number of these, or increase them?

1) So, money. Just like all of your objections and observed effects to for example that pizza place, revolve around money.
2) A few weeks shutdown /= collapse of society. It may lay bare some inherent weaknesses to whatever system you have, but that is then something you can learn from and improve on.

I'm going to just group the rest of your bullet points in one response. You seem to think that I'm acting selfishly, and that the only thing I care about is money. And I doubt there is anything I can do to dissuade you from such an ignorant notion. So let me just leave you with this final thought before you go off and rage at a cloud about what a terrible, awful person I am:

More people will die from this isolation and economic shutdown than will be saved from it. It won't be over in a month or two when the coronavirus stops killing. It will affect the health and well being of millions for decades.

You can't possibly know that - you just started this post and one before it about how statistics and (by extension) large numbers are unreliable (kudos for mentioning my favorite Mark Twain quote, by the way).
The problem is, statistics is one of the only ways we have of dealing with large numbers. And while it can be and often is manipulated - especially by people/corporations/organisations with vested interest- when used correctly it can also offer great insights.
Plus, what else do you suggest we use? What alternatives do you offer?

Well if you destroy the quality of people's lives then they have less to lose if they die! Win-win? Wait...

I am very glad I no longer have a main street small business right now. Those are all dead without direct government infusions of cash. Tax breaks won't cut it because you have to be in business long enough to collect.

My town is a tourist driven local economy. I expect it to be completely and utterly destroyed by this.

However, even without the county closing them down..... they would have been destroyed anyway.

They've banned all on-premise serving at restaurants in Florida. Pretty much every server in the state just lost their job. But that's not the weird thing.

The governor has released an executive order deciding which medical procedures can be performed. Maybe it is just me, but I think the doctors are best able to judge what medical procedures are necessary and they are capable of doing. I'm not really sure why the state government has the ability to decide, for example, what procedures a dentist is allowed to perform. Seems a bit unconstitutional to me (I'd protest, but my right to assemble is a bit limited if more than 5 people show up).

This is bs. This is dangerous. People literally can't go to the doctor right now. They can't get procedures that will improve their health or even save their lives because someone decided that the procedure is elective. Somebody needs to explain to me why a dermatologist's office needs to stop seeing patients because of the coronavirus...

 Sqorgar wrote:
1) There's no way to predict that 40-60% of the population will catch it. For one thing, there are mitigating factors that could greatly affect transmission. Northern Italy is in the perfect climate area for this virus, meaning that if you move a little bit to the north or south of it, the infection rate is considerably slower. The virus is most able to survive in the 40s Farenheit, and even 1 degree can make a huge difference in the spread. The majority of the US is not in this band right now. You could possibly say that New York City will have a similar infection rate, but even that will probably not work out the same because NYC is starting much later and it is getting warmer and warmer. It is possible that we could see similar outbreaks in similar climates in the southern hemisphere, or potentially again in the US next year, but right now during this emergency, the US is not going to resemble Italy.

Uh, what? Perfect climate?

If you actually bothered to look at virus infection rates, one of the most heavily hit countries in the world (total cases per 1000) is Iceland, followed by Faroes and Norway. Last time I checked, none had Italian climate and all were in fact considerably colder. Ditto for Holland and Germany, two other major European hotspots. On the other end, the country hardest hit after Italy is Iran, followed by Brunei, Bahrain and Quatar (last three have about 3.5x infection rates per population UK or USA have). These countries are all considerably warmer than Italy. Where do you see this "perfect" climate, because you can make similar arguments for literally every single Eurasian climate zone? Especially seeing Iran thanks to US embargo has extremely limited access to medicine supplies, including tests, and its regime has a lot of extra incentives to hide virus numbers (and no free press to report it, meaning it's probably much harder hit and what they reported is rosy propaganda) making their 'real' numbers likely much higher - funnily enough, this supposed 'warmth' effect did little to help them.

Also, now that I think about it, Iran's response very much resembles that of USA, not European/Asian model - people mostly left to their own devices, a few blind token gestures, no centralized state/healthcare response - and guess what its numbers predict? Minimum 150.000 cases in USA, with at least 2.000 dead - and that's with their 'official' numbers, as well as USA suddenly relocating to south Mexico to gain this mythical 'huge difference' in the spread - because more realistic assessment is 3 to 4 times that. Likely more, much more because Iran doesn't have so many big cities or people traveling the length of the country so often and if the temperature did in fact help Iranians, USA won't see similar effect for months, especially heavily populated north of the country. So, yeah, if you're correct in that the USA won't resemble Italy it will be because it will resemble Iran, a considerably less pretty picture:

https://www.space.com/iran-coronavirus-graves-satellite-images.html

Okay I am an accountant in a small UK firm. The boss has told us that he wants us to continue working at the office in the town centre. How reasonable is to object to this? For context, I have a laptop, all the company files and records can be accessed remotely. The only thing I won’t be able to do is directly consult with the manager face to face and prepare a physical accounts file. Most of our clients aren’t using physical records and where there do they can scan these over. I can reasonably do the greater part of my job from home. In fact I have worked from home several times before. His position is that our ability to operate remotely is not sufficient and that quality of work would suffer.

We were asked to provide reasons on our availability to work from home. I was pretty emphatic but the general advice is that unless you have children or live with someone ask risk he still wants us coming into the office.

I am concerned because both my Dad just turned 60 and my mums a few years younger. However they’re not in the at risk group. Plus, I have not been diagnosed with any medical conditions but I am not particularly healthy myself. So I have worries about catching this thing. Maybe I am overreacting. Perhaps.

Am I within my rights to object to this and insist on working from home?

I’ve also been asked to attend a stock take at a commercial meat factory. This is despite me knowing nothing about stocktaking and purely to keep up the appearance of a familiar face to the client.

Eh I'd say that your health and those of who you live with comes before the boss's desire to maintain things as they are. It's my observation that some people adapt to a changing situation more readily than others. Some just want things to keep going as they were and not worry about it and part of that is trying to keep things just as they were.

It's sometimes the fact that they've not taken it all on board; or they have and trying to avoid changing things is part of a coping mechanism to lowering their stress. If they aren't changing its not "real".


I'd say if you can work from home put your reasoning in and then self-isolate. It's a risk of course, but at the same time its very reasonable considering the current climate; especially in urban areas.

 Irbis wrote:

Uh, what? Perfect climate?

If you actually bothered to look at virus infection rates, one of the most heavily hit countries in the world (total cases per 1000) is Iceland, followed by Faroes and Norway. Last time I checked, none had Italian climate and all were in fact considerably colder. Ditto for Holland and Germany, two other major European hotspots. On the other end, the country hardest hit after Italy is Iran, followed by Brunei, Bahrain and Quatar (last three have about 3.5x infection rates per population UK or USA have). These countries are all considerably warmer than Italy. Where do you see this "perfect" climate, because you can make similar arguments for literally every single Eurasian climate zone? Especially seeing Iran thanks to US embargo has extremely limited access to medicine supplies, including tests, and its regime has a lot of extra incentives to hide virus numbers (and no free press to report it, meaning it's probably much harder hit and what they reported is rosy propaganda) making their 'real' numbers likely much higher - funnily enough, this supposed 'warmth' effect did little to help them.

If you bothered to read my past posts, you would've found that I've linked this article multiple times.



The green area is the the perfect climate. This graph is the average temperature from March 2019 to April 2019, and thus the exact location of that green area is probably slightly different in 2020 (not to mention that the outbreaks started in February, when the green would've been lower). And, as expected, as the temperatures warm, the green area moves further north. You'll find most of the countries you listed in that green band, or close enough to it. Iran and the immediate area has cooler temperatures due to its proximity to the sea.

According to this article, "An increase of just one degree Celsius and 1% relative humidity increase substantially lower the virus's transmission...". They studied the coronavirus outbreak in 100 Chinese cities and found a relationship between temperature and humidity to the severity of the outbreak. There's some pretty graphs in this article that should make the green band a little more explicit.



There's two different studies - two different sources - that essentially say the same thing.

 Overread wrote:
Eh I'd say that your health and those of who you live with comes before the boss's desire to maintain things as they are. It's my observation that some people adapt to a changing situation more readily than others. Some just want things to keep going as they were and not worry about it and part of that is trying to keep things just as they were.

It's sometimes the fact that they've not taken it all on board; or they have and trying to avoid changing things is part of a coping mechanism to lowering their stress. If they aren't changing its not "real".


I'd say if you can work from home put your reasoning in and then self-isolate. It's a risk of course, but at the same time its very reasonable considering the current climate; especially in urban areas.

My concern is that it would lead to disciplinary action if I was to insist on this and not going on the stocktake. We are one week away from the March payroll and I don’t want that in jeopardy. I had assumed that he was building towards everyone working from home because it’s such an obvious move. For him to come to the totally opposite conclusion is horrendous. I don’t get it. Not only that but to even be considering stocktakes and send me out when I am literally going to be wheeled around for some reason.

From talking to my friends all of them are working from home apart from the doctor and the nurse....

His interpretation of the guidance is that unless somebody is sick then there’s no need to self isolate or distance staff. Even then he was talking about just putting sick people in other rooms...where there’s a shared toilet and kitchen area.

Wait, I thought you didn't trust statistics?
But now a statistical correlation is in your favour it's suddenly ironclad proof of " the perfect virus temperature"?

TW - honestly if he's talking about isolation of the sick being in another room it sounds like he's really not grasped the situation at all. I'd say you'd likely not be the only disgruntled one in the office at this news. Honestly I'd talk to other staff, chances are if a bunch of you simply walk out and work from home he won't have much of a leg to stand on and might well back down.

You might also talk to citizens advise (if you can get through); there might well be legal recourse if he aims to take disciplinary action against you when your walk out is based on government mandated health advice. Sometimes even the threat of that to a boss giving an unreasonable request can force them to reconsider their actions.


It's a tough call though, as you say you've got a months pay just a week away that you don't want frozen or withdrawn - which of course pays for food and shelter (important things for healthy living).

-removed-

Bran Dawri wrote:
Wait, I thought you didn't trust statistics?
But now a statistical correlation is in your favour it's suddenly ironclad proof of " the perfect virus temperature"?

I trust statistics when I know how they are calculated. When someone says the coronavirus is 20 times more deadly than the flu - how did you arrive at that statistic? If you can't show me where it came from, then it definitely is suspect. Case in point, they calculate the flu mortality rate using estimated numbers, which are at least three times higher than confirmed cases, but calculate the coronavirus mortality rate using only confirmed cases. This means that you can't say that the coronavirus is more deadly than the flu because you aren't comparing two statistics talking about the same thing. And because I know what that methodology is, I know that the statistics are bs. If I didn't know that, and believed that the two mortality rates were equivalent, I'd be the same dumb donkey-cave as everyone else freaking the feth out over complete bs.

Interestingly enough, if you compare the same statistics - confirmed deaths divided by confirmed cases - the flu has a mortality rate that is at least two to four times that of the coronavirus. And that's with the extreme selection bias in coronavirus testing.

These two articles associate the temperature and humidity with transmission rate. How they calculate the transmission rate is largely irrelevant, so long as they use the same methodology for each data point. The two different studies can even use two different transmission rate calculations, as long as they are internally consistent. In the end, they independently arrived at similar conclusions, using two different sets of data and two different (consistent) methodologies, which makes a very strong argument for their being a correlation, even if they individually differ about the explicit value of that correlation.

Historically speaking, pandemics and social unrest usually is followed by rapid growth and change.
The Black death killed feudalism, WW1 gave birth to female voting and boom in economy, maybe this thing will be the push to do away with corporate oligarchy in many western countries, now that we know supermarket clerks are more vital to our civilization than a whole bushel of ceos.

1000 confirmed cases in Canada and 13 dead so far.
At the beginning of the week it was around 341 confirmed and no reported deaths on Monday.

The cases tripled 5 days, and 13 deaths were within that time.

And this all happened during an almost complete lockdown of the entire country.

I really don’t feel this is the time to be telling anyone to go about their business as though nothing is happening.

The guy posted a theory and backed it up with evidence... Unless you have a counter theory you can also back up with evidence, then you can't just dismiss it out of hand. I haven't really followed your back and forth throughout the thread, but that's what I've seen on this page at least.

How about a confirmed news report (NYT) of a family dinner last Tuesday, followed by 4 of the family members dead by the following week, and 2 in intensive care, with 19 others being tested. All the deceased and those in intensive care positive for coronavirus.

All the deceased under 60, with no preexisting conditions that have been listed by the authorities? This really is no joke.

On a on topic but slightly lighter note

 Cruentus wrote:
How about a confirmed news report (NYT) of a family dinner last Tuesday, followed by 4 of the family members dead by the following week, and 2 in intensive care, with 19 others being tested. All the deceased and those in intensive care positive for coronavirus.

All the deceased under 60, with no preexisting conditions that have been listed by the authorities? This really is no joke.

1. Literally no one has called this a joke. "Same as flu" is the most dismissive I've seen. Bit dishonest there.

2. That's your angle here? We found a body of 20 people infected with four dead. And this means we should allow governors to shut down elective surgeries? How long exactly should we quarantine the world now? Four months? Four weeks? However long the experts recommend plus one week because of this family?

3. I'm quite sure one of the deceased you mentioned was 73. All the rest were indeed under 60, but over 50.



I know that you are dealing with people who are not taking this seriously. Far more of them exist than is good for humanity.

Please understand there are also sky is falling types we (at least I personally am) are dealing with as well.

TW: I would offer a compromise, work at home but come in one day a week of his choice. Yes, you will be considerably more exposed but it gives your boss something and shows you at least respect his viewpoint on the matter. If/when he turns it down, say you can do two days a week. If he turns that down respectfully inform him it wasn't an offer because the lives of your family members are more important than his desires for the schedule. His ability to punish you has limits, because 15 minutes of on social media about how he is penalizing you for trying to keep your family healthy would destroy him. To say nothing of a potential lawsuit.

But that is very, very IMO. I obviously know extremely little about the greater context so take with enough salt to ward off Horticulous.

Been disinfecting doors, desks, counter tops ect in the warehouse, offices and shop front twice daily(at least) for two weeks. Delivery drivers and counter staff wearing latex gloves to interact with customers(cant get hand sanitizer, and washing your hands all the time is not always practical and murder on your skin) for a week and a half. Put up signs about social distancing three days ago. Today we marked out a one meter deep box in front of the counter with hazard tape on the floor and put a sandwich board in front with a distancing sign on it.
Watching the general publics behaviour over that time we might as well screaming into a hurricane

 Cruentus wrote:
How about a confirmed news report (NYT) of a family dinner last Tuesday, followed by 4 of the family members dead by the following week, and 2 in intensive care, with 19 others being tested. All the deceased and those in intensive care positive for coronavirus.

All the deceased under 60, with no preexisting conditions that have been listed by the authorities? This really is no joke.

You mean this family?


Does being morbidly obese count as a preexisting condition? They may not have had any diagnosed conditions, but it you told me they all had undiagnosed, untreated cardiovascular disorders and type 2 diabetes, I wouldn't be shocked. The husband of one of my kids' math teachers was about that size and he died of a heart attack at age 34.

The grandmother was 73, and the people under 60 were all in their mid-to-late 50s. The four that died were the two women in the front and the two men in the back, farthest to the left.

Also worth noting that the grandfather was born and raised in Italy, first coming to the US when he was 18. That's a weird connection and I wonder if maybe there is a genetic component at play here.

And side note, I found another article with a similar picture of the same people in front of the same mantle, but they seem considerably thinner.

 Galas wrote:
Someday I'll find someone that will be able to explain to me why the US health system is better than most european ones.

Or at minimun, is a functional health system. I'm still waiting for that day.

That really sucks Bob. I hope you'll pass this without bigger problems.

The argument seems to boil down to "Because 'Murica! Capitalism rules Socialism drools!"

GoatboyBeta wrote:
Been disinfecting doors, desks, counter tops ect in the warehouse, offices and shop front twice daily(at least) for two weeks. Delivery drivers and counter staff wearing latex gloves to interact with customers(cant get hand sanitizer, and washing your hands all the time is not always practical and murder on your skin) for a week and a half. Put up signs about social distancing three days ago. Today we marked out a one meter deep box in front of the counter with hazard tape on the floor and put a sandwich board in front with a distancing sign on it.
Watching the general publics behaviour over that time we might as well screaming into a hurricane

I disagree; even if the general public does not take safety measures you doing so still has a benefit. Perhaps not as much of one, but it is still something.

 Togusa wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Someday I'll find someone that will be able to explain to me why the US health system is better than most european ones.

Or at minimun, is a functional health system. I'm still waiting for that day.

That really sucks Bob. I hope you'll pass this without bigger problems.

All I can say is this. Ten years ago, if I had a medical problem, I would call my mother who is a nurse and ask who the best doctor in my area was to go and see. She would tell me, and I would call them up. Usually I could up their office, head over within 7-10 days (sooner if it was more serious) and be seen, prescribed and on my way. Then one day there was this new law that was passed, the law that is commonly known as Obama Care. Ever since the passage of that law my ability to get treatment, the cost of my medications, my ability to even bee seen in a timely manner has gone from acceptable to nearly unusable. My insurance costs skyrocketed to much that I had to change providers a total of three times in a 4 year period just to keep costs manageable. My average wait time to be seen for medical help in the last two years has figured out to around 20 days.

Lucky you!

Prior to Obamacare that was my life, and it's only since Obamacare that I've been able to get ANY medical care.

The problem isn't Obamacare. The problem is that American health care is fundamentally broken for two-thirds of Americans.

I did a little more shopping today. Some people were coughing in the supermarket. Stocks are low, out of key items now like milk.

As of today I have decided to shut the door and bunker down, the mask did not arrive and I was advised that if I travel to London don't return to look after my father, mask or no mask. So I decided to ignore the mandatory gas safety check. I am staying here where I can look after my father. I will not leave the house again until I have the mask. The % of infection is rising daily and I no longer want to risk it.
The housing association might cause problems, but I can cover myself under the mantra of 'self isolation'.

Any idea on how to freeze milk? I am thinking of converting some catheter bags.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cronch wrote:
Historically speaking, pandemics and social unrest usually is followed by rapid growth and change.
The Black death killed feudalism, WW1 gave birth to female voting and boom in economy, maybe this thing will be the push to do away with corporate oligarchy in many western countries, now that we know supermarket clerks are more vital to our civilization than a whole bushel of ceos.

I agree with this in general principle. The virus can be a catalyst for change. The US is ripe for social change. However it could also mean the downfall of western economic dominance, global destabilisation and war.
The Blacjk Death left a resource void, COVID-19 will not. Instead it will destabilise power blocks and some could use this to grab a larger share of the planets diminishing resources.