Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

New Thread! Post Covid WorldFollow

#27 May 19 2020 at 7:29 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
Allegory wrote:
You're stupid Demea.

I was going to lead with, "that's pretty harsh", but then remembered where this is.

Instead, I'm going with, perhaps "the lady doth protest too much"??
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#28 May 19 2020 at 9:45 AM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,658 posts
Allegory wrote:
... I realized once again that every negative stereotype I suspected of being my own personal bias was once again insufficient.

Demea wrote:
Allegory wrote:
All of my pre-existing beliefs are reaffirmed.

I exaggerated a bit to emphasize the point, but not much.

Allegory wrote:
lots of mean words

I feel like you missed the point of my snide remark, but that's what I get for being so very clever I suppose. I imagine you and I agree quite a bit on the stupidity of the current political climate in the US, but diverge wildly on the best way to fix it.

C'est la vie.

Edited, May 19th 2020 9:50am by Demea
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#29 May 19 2020 at 5:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,469 posts
Demea wrote:
diverge wildly on the best way to fix it.
Napalm everything into glass and start over.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#30 May 19 2020 at 7:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,658 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Demea wrote:
diverge wildly on the best way to fix it.
Napalm everything into glass and start over.

*Ride of the Valkyries begins to play*
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#31 May 20 2020 at 8:19 PM Rating: Good
***
3,907 posts
I will sit on the sideline and sing "Kill the WABBIT" for you guys!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#32 May 21 2020 at 2:28 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,457 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
What exact action did Trump do that you believe resulted in mass deaths? Not just deaths, but "murder" (ie: he intended for people to die when performing the action, which is, you know, what makes something murder)?
If you and I are SCUBA diving and I disable your gear on accident and I can fix it but I choose not to and you die...that's murder.


Sure. if you know the gear is broken and allow someone to use it, that's at least negligent homicide. Maybe murder if there's some reason to suspect targeted intent rather than simple neglect. Ok.

Quote:
If I steal PPE material in large quantities when I know it is needed immediately...that's murder, too. The second one is what we call "depraved indifference"...a MURDER charge.


Er... Ok. You'd have to show that Trump "stole" PPE material. The reality is that the Trump administration came into this with a badly depleted stockpile of emergency medical equipment. Something that I'm sure you'll agree a president is unlikely to personally know about, only getting broad numbers filtered up through various reports from various agencies prior to the virus hitting. The other problem is that nearly all PPE in the normal manufacturing pipeline is built in... wait for it... China. China did this funny thing where they gathered up all the PPE they had and provided it to allies that support it politically in the region and slowed down or stopped shipments to other nations (like us).

Trump was put in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. He's got half of the governors screaming at him to send them PPE, but to do that the Federal government has to buy it, and that leads to the other half claiming he's "stealing PPE" from them by buying from the same meager supplies that they are competing for.

I's beyond absurd to call that "murder". Trump has to operate on the information he's given. And at the start of this, he was told that we had sufficient emergency supplies in stock. It's not like you can expect him to personally check every box to see if that is correct. As it turned out, a lot of that supply existed only on paper, with past administrators of the various agencies responsible having just left very old and broken equipment on the books to satisfy the numerical requirements, without actually verifying things.

That's also ignoring the fact that PPE shortages occurred in many hospitals prior to the virus hitting. Those pictures of nurses wearing garbage bags? You can find similar pictures from folks complaining about lack of proper protective gear going back years in some of these cities. That has to do with funding within the hospitals themselves, and local health care funding. Adding a pandemic on top of already short supplies is just going to make things worse, but you can't actually blame Trump for that.

Well, you can, but then you're just engaging in hysterics.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
All because of their obsession to get Trump back for the horrible crime of winning an election.
The horrible crimes committed to win the election.Smiley: schooled


Except for the fact that after 2.5 years of investigating, no crimes were actually found to have been committed "to win the election".

____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#33 May 21 2020 at 2:54 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,457 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
"Belief" is not co-equal with science, sorry.


It's interesting for you to say that, given that you are simply declaring your belief to be science, and thus declaring that any opposing opinion is "against science". Um... Actual science doesn't work that way. Science very rarely gives us one and only one answer though. Science tells us what is true and what is not true. It does not tell us what the best course of action to take in response to those truths is though.

Some people seem to think that it does, though.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
I laid out the argument quite clearly. We believe that there will be fewer deaths if we do it our way instead of the current method, which says that some 60 year old guy with diabetes should continue working because he works in a grocery store, but a 25 year old in perfect health should stay at home and not work (and not earn a paycheck) because he works in a t-shirt shop. That's totally illogical.
The fact that a 25 year old may easily carry the virus without getting terribly sick, giving him a chance to spread it never once entering into your mind. Astonishing


Never entering my mind despite me previously addressing that exact issue. Hmmm...

Let me re-explain this. If you keep all the at risk folks (said 60 year old with diabetes and a heart condition), at home where they are not interacting with people, and allow the healthy folks to go out freely, then yes, they will carry the virus without getting terribly sick, giving them the chance to spread it to other folks who are not at risk and will also carry the virus without getting terribly sick. See, cause the at risk folks, who might become terribly sick or even die, are all at home not being exposed.

What part of that do you not understand? This process is what builds herd immunity. Which means that after a relatively short amount of time, all those healthy people, who are not likely to get terribly sick, will have been exposed, have build up immunity, and then there's no one left to carry the virus anymore, and it fades away.

The result of this process is that you ultimately protect the at risk population because they are surrounded by folks with resistance and/or immunity, and thus significantly reduce the vectors of transmission to the at risk folks. Once that immunity rat is high enough, the at risk people can come out to play because the chances of the virus hitting them at that point are low, and it becomes more like a seasonal flu risk.

That's actual science btw. What's baffling to me is that the same folks who are absolute experts on herd immunity when it comes to a vaccination thread seem to be taking the exact opposite position in this case. So when the issue is forcing people to take vaccinations to build herd immunity and protect the at risk folks, of course we should do it. But when the issue is *not* forcing people to stay at home so they can freely move around and build herd immunity naturally and protect the at risk folks, it's suddenly a terrible idea.

You'd almost think that the underlying ideology behind that set of positions is the desire to use the government to force people to do things and not really about public health. It's only consistent in the "force people to do things", and not in the "best for public health". And again, that's just me observing the pattern of positions people take and what commonalities they have. Which again, is science. Observing patterns and making deductions based on them.


Quote:
gbaji wrote:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Tell me again who just passed a law stating that your search history no longer needs a search warrant for the Feds to look at it. And who presented that bill to begin with. Get back to me on that, will you?


I have no idea. Why don't you tell me? And maybe explain how this is relevant rather than a pivot from the subject?

The only thing I could find on this was a discussion about how the patriot act may allow this, but it's unclear how often it's actually been used.

Um. I'll also put on my IT hat and point out that you don't actually own your search history. The search engine online does. If google chooses to track which searches are done from each IP connected to their servers, they can do that. In the same way that Amazon may remember which searches and purchases you have performed in the past (how sites steer you to "things similar to what you've previously looked at" stuff). They own the data after all. And thus, law enforcement would require only a subpoena to get that, not a warrant.

That's pretty far far away from prohibiting people from working, or gathering (free association is a right, right?), or frankly doing whatever they want. You're trying to equate a single stone with a mountain. It's that positive versus negative thing again. It's one thing to prohibit actions that are innately harmful. It's another to prohibit *all* actions except for those the government deems essential (again, not even "not harmful", as my "60 year old health care worker" example shows). The latter is a massive infringement of our liberties.

Edited, May 21st 2020 12:55pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#34 May 21 2020 at 6:48 PM Rating: Good
***
3,907 posts
Remember when it was nice, and quiet, and Gbaji free?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#35 May 22 2020 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,802 posts
gbaji wrote:
If you keep all the at risk folks (said 60 year old with diabetes and a heart condition), at home where they are not interacting with people, and allow the healthy folks to go out freely, then yes, they will carry the virus without getting terribly sick, giving them the chance to spread it to other folks who are not at risk and will also carry the virus without getting terribly sick.
...who will take it home to at risk people.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#36 May 22 2020 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,802 posts
stupidmonkey wrote:
Remember when it was nice, and quiet, and Gbaji free?
On the up side, I'm posting a lot more!!Smiley: tongue
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#37 May 22 2020 at 7:50 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,802 posts
gbaji wrote:
It's interesting for you to say that, given that you are simply declaring your belief to be science, and thus declaring that any opposing opinion is "against science".
I don't "believe in" science; I trust it. Nice try, Ben Shapiro.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#38 Jun 12 2020 at 4:54 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,457 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If you keep all the at risk folks (said 60 year old with diabetes and a heart condition), at home where they are not interacting with people, and allow the healthy folks to go out freely, then yes, they will carry the virus without getting terribly sick, giving them the chance to spread it to other folks who are not at risk and will also carry the virus without getting terribly sick.
...who will take it home to at risk people.


Sigh. And people wonder why I feel the need to be verbose and repeat myself:

me, in my very first post in this thread wrote:
This would allow most businesses to open up. Instead of handing out cash to everyone in an industry that isn't on the "can open" list, we could spend a faction of that money and simply pay employers to retain employees who are staying at home due to their own or a household members risk status. That would put only those at risk at home, and cost us only what we need to pay to keep them safe.



I have always been talking about households, not just individuals. Obviously, if you have an at-risk person in your household then you should follow stay at home rules. But right now, we're *not* doing it this way, and still aren't. If you work in an "essential" job, you go to work and risk exposing yourself or anyone living with you, with zero consideration of "at risk" status.

Having people stay home, not based on the jobs they do, but the risk status of themselves and those living with them, would allow far more businesses to open up, and would cost a fraction of what we've been paying to keep people at home, and have far less economic impact. Most people don't live with their elderly parents in the same house. Most people who are elderly are also already retired, and thus don't impact the economy if they stay at home.

We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#39 Jun 15 2020 at 8:37 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
Abstinence is the only sure way.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#40 Jun 15 2020 at 10:35 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
This disease kills people - not just old people, not just people with known preexisting conditions. It's killing essential workers from health care to retail to meat-packers.

Covid deaths of essential workers - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yXze6XvrikYtcBirqEnRJYU4HxRO5LMmY6F88FkkvZI/edit#gid=184674308
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#41 Jun 15 2020 at 11:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
37 posts
gbaji wrote:
We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.


It's almost like we haven't had any leadership being advised by teams of scientists specializing in pandemics/epidemics telling state and local governments what to do, and we've instead had to figure it out on our own.

Real talk though, the blanket stay-at-home order was because we didn't know how bad it would be, how contagious it was, and we needed to try stopping the spread as much as possible while science caught up. Which would have worked, had people not violently knee-jerked against the orders. Now we're at 120k dead due to COVID, which is over 1/4th of the global death count.

But hey, we're #1 at something, right?
#42 Jun 16 2020 at 6:40 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
Velicenda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.


It's almost like we haven't had any leadership being advised by teams of scientists specializing in pandemics/epidemics telling state and local governments what to do, and we've instead had to figure it out on our own.

Hah. Yeah the pres farked up this one badly. Just forget about it.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#43 Jun 16 2020 at 4:02 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,802 posts
Elinda wrote:
Velicenda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.
It's almost like we haven't had any leadership being advised by teams of scientists specializing in pandemics/epidemics telling state and local governments what to do, and we've instead had to figure it out on our own.
Hah. Yeah the pres farked up this one badly. Just forget about it.
It's almost as if Trump doesn't want to antagonize his "Christian"* base with facts and stuff.



*In this case meaning ignorant, racist rubes he so desperately panders to.






Yes, I dangled a participle...sue me.Smiley: mad
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#44 Jun 16 2020 at 7:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
37 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Velicenda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.
It's almost like we haven't had any leadership being advised by teams of scientists specializing in pandemics/epidemics telling state and local governments what to do, and we've instead had to figure it out on our own.
Hah. Yeah the pres farked up this one badly. Just forget about it.
It's almost as if Trump doesn't want to antagonize his "Christian"* base with facts and stuff.



*In this case meaning ignorant, racist rubes he so desperately panders to.






Yes, I dangled a participle...sue me.Smiley: mad


To whom he panders***


(No more monopoly on the front page for you!)
#45 Jun 26 2020 at 6:47 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,738 posts
Florida.


Edited, Jun 26th 2020 7:47am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#46 Jun 26 2020 at 8:37 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
Omg I can't figure out what god wants me to do. Does HE want me to wear a mask or not??

I'm supposed to go travel - over the 4th. I'm driving to central NY and spending two days at my daughters, then on to WI to see my dad. He's getting to be pretty old and having a surgery. My plan is to see him before he goes into surgery - and then to be around to help out after the surgery as he'll be off his feet and will have a colostomy bag. I won't be staying at his place, but at a nearby hotel.

I've made a sleeping bag thing (sewed a sheet into a bag with an attached pillow) for hotel stays. I have a box of face masks (not N95 but just the face covering). Lots of nitrile gloves, wipes sanitizers etc. NY should allow me in the state without a 2-week quarantine as I'm not coming from a 'hot spot'. I also will be going through MA, PA, OH, IN, IL. I don't plan on stopping in any of these except for gas and bathroom. When I do this road trip I typically stop for the night in around the IN/IL border. I may or may not do this this trip. I might just do a 4-5 hour power nap in my car. Then of course I'll be turning around and driving back to Maine. Maine currently has a 2-week quarantine for anyone coming into the state. So presumably I'll have to quarantine upon coming home. That shouldn't be much of an issue as I can work from home.

This is not essential travel. My dad has a girlfriend who is willing and able to care for him plus I have one sister that lives only 2 hours away from him. But HE wants me to come out as I only see him once year. With the latest surge in covid cases I'm having second thoughts about going. What do you think?

Should Anyone be taking Non-essential car trips across the northeastern part of the country?
Yes :1 (25.0%)
No :2 (50.0%)
Other:1 (25.0%)
Total:4


In better news Strawberry season is going on as planned - and they've arrived! Smiley: drool

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#47 Jun 26 2020 at 7:17 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,738 posts
That whole townhall was like an episode of Parks & Rec.

As far as travel, I wouldn't do it. But if you are, should probably call or look up what exactly is happening in New York day of travel so you don't get suckered into being stuck and your day trip becomes unexpectedly extended.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#48 Jun 26 2020 at 7:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,469 posts
Why do you need a sleeping bag in a hotel? If its a reputable brand then they've all come out with more stringent and thorough cleaning procedures and unlike most places, they get cleaned on a regular basis prior to this.

I know specifically, Marriott, IHG (Holiday Inn), Hilton, Wyndham, Best Western, Radisson and Choice have all enacted better cleaning procedures. I imagine just about all of the others have as well.

As for your poll, i haven't been paying attention to the **** show you guys have going on down there since our border is still locked down from you and have been focusing on us. Not sure which specific areas are still bad, other than Florida and that 9k new cases in one day fiasco. ******* Florida...

Edited, Jun 26th 2020 9:18pm by Uglysasquatch
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#49 Jun 28 2020 at 7:32 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,718 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Why do you need a sleeping bag in a hotel? If its a reputable brand then they've all come out with more stringent and thorough cleaning procedures and unlike most places, they get cleaned on a regular basis prior to this.

I guess I thought of it more to help keep my germs close, but yeah, it's more a feel-good thing I suppose. I'm staying at my daughters, and then a Hotel 8 in WI as it's the closest place to my Dads.





Edited, Jun 29th 2020 2:33am by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#50 Jun 30 2020 at 5:57 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,457 posts
Velicenda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We're following a policy that honestly makes no sense. Even the whole phased re-openinig isn't terribly logical. It's like someone got it stuck in their brain to orient on how essential a business is and just never thought to re-examine that assumption.


It's almost like we haven't had any leadership being advised by teams of scientists specializing in pandemics/epidemics telling state and local governments what to do, and we've instead had to figure it out on our own.


Um... It was the teams of scientists who advised that we close based on "essential jobs". Have you ever bothered to watch any of those briefings with the various doctors that went on every freaking day for like 2 months?

Quote:
Real talk though, the blanket stay-at-home order was because we didn't know how bad it would be, how contagious it was, and we needed to try stopping the spread as much as possible while science caught up.


Yes. It made a lot of sense before we had a better handle on actual mortality rates among different people and knew who were most at risk. The issue is that as we learned this information, the policy of aligning openings based on the jobs people do instead of their at risk status has remained in place. And yes, this is still coming from the scientists and experts and not just politicians. If anything, it's politicians and pundits on the right that are making the kind of argument that I'm making. Of course, we then get bashed for "ignoring the science". Um... Stop thinking with labels and actually look at who is saying what. It's all the doctors and health experts on TV who are still insisting on stay at home being about essential work.

Quote:
Which would have worked, had people not violently knee-jerked against the orders.


Um.. Actually it did work. We did not experience the overwhelming of our health care system that was feared at first. Even NY, the hardest hit area never came close to overwhelming their resources. The overflow facilities that were built largely stood empty and unused, and the hospital ship was barely used either.

There was no knee jerk response against the orders. The only thing close was in Michigan where the governor went so far beyond what was required even following the info we had very early on that it was less about stopping the virus and seemed more like maximizing the economic and social harm from the lock down itself. As that data we mentioned earlier came in showing where the real risks lay, she basically ignored it and went full press on stopping folks from doing pretty much anything. Um... How does not allowing folks to go stay at their lake home and instead requiring them to stay in the city slow the spread of covid? Wouldn't more people packed into a small area be worse? Yet, that's what she did. That's honestly a whole separate discussion, but the point is that overall people did comply with the various state's decisions. Some states made better decisions than others, but that's why we are the USA and not Americaland.

Quote:
Now we're at 120k dead due to COVID, which is over 1/4th of the global death count.


Uh... Those stats are a bit questionable since it depends on whether a given country records a death as "due to covid" or "died while having covid". One of the interesting effects of the US health care system (not super socialist, right?), is that emergency funds help to pay for medical expenses when it's from an emergency (like covid), so a hospital literally has a financial incentive to list anyone who dies who has covid as having died *from* covid. Heck, we could get really morbid and even note that any hospital with a ward of "very sick patients" who don't have covid (say they're dying of cancer or whatever) would have an incentive to infect them with covid (yeah, that's just an ugly thought though, so lets assume that no one's evil enough to do that).

Other countries, say with more socialized medical systems and where a desire to show that their health care system worked better at dealing with a pandemic might have an incentive to only list a death as a covid death if the sole and only cause of death was due to being infected with covid. To what degree this is affecting the final numbers is subject to debate. However, there are definitely differences in how different countries report covid deaths, whether with any specific or nefarious purpose or not. So I'd take those numbers with a massive grain of salt.

Quote:
But hey, we're #1 at something, right?


Actually, even using your stats, when we crunch the numbers per capita, we're number 2. UK has the highest rate of deaths, not the US. Again though, it all depends on how the numbers are generated in the first place.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 2 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (2)