Coronavirus / COVID-19

1424345474876

Comments

  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    tom_g said:
    Experts v willfully ignorant should not be thought of as a debate.
    This - as far as I can tell - only serves to illustrate the original point.
  • tom_gtom_g WV
    edited May 2020
    No, the original point implied an actual debate . . . there is not one.
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    tom_g said:
    No, the original point implied an actual debate . . . there is not one.
    Are you suggesting that there is a 100% consensus about exactly how and when to ease lock-down restrictions among those with a reasonably informed or "expert" opinion? 

    Can you tell me where to find this? 
  • fidozfidoz Houston
    Remember that time I had to threaten my mom that I'd start posting all my atheist views on facebook if she didn't stop posting fox news conspiracy theories?  Yeah that was 5 minutes ago. 
    ChinaskicdriveMichelleNoelFreddyFlukes
  • No, not when, just that NOW is not when.  I have not seen one expert say any state is ready.  Community, county, township, maybe.

    An actual debate about the right time - let's have it.
    DeeGiovanni
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    tom_g said:
    No, not when, just that NOW is not when.  I have not seen one expert say any state is ready.  Community, county, township, maybe.

    1. So, you personally have not seen one expert say that any state is ready, and on this basis you conclude "There is literally no debate to be had about whether or not any state is ready."?

    2. You admit that there there might be communities, counties, townships that are ready to ease restrictions... but that speaks to the very first point of the original quote. You saying "There's no room for a debate." seems to suggest that you think that the other side is "all-or-nothing". There are plenty of people who have called for more localized, limited easing - which you seem to think might be okay. 
    An actual debate about the right time - let's have it.
    3. So, now are you conceding that there *is* a debate to be had? 

    4. I am in no position to do the utility calculus required to come up with a reasonable answer about what the right policy is here. I can only begin to do some of the difficult accounting work of tallying the huge and widely varied amounts of costs and benefits that would come form easing or the choice not to ease. And, for what it's worth, the idea that the calculation is simply "saving lives vs. the economy" is a false dichotomy. There will be human suffering whether or not we ease the lock-down. And yes, some of the suffering from not easing is avoidable death (e.g. suicide, domestic abuse, people not getting treatment for non-covid ailments, etc.). 
    rhcoop
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    Over 75000 deaths within a couple of months, but sure, seems like a good time to discuss re-opening things, and yes, both sides very fine people, lobbing up to government buildings with guns to make demands, very reasonable, yada yada. 
    GiovanniFlukes
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    edited May 2020
    Dee said:
    Over 75000 deaths within a couple of months, but sure, seems like a good time to discuss re-opening things, 
    Are you suggesting that we shouldn't ease any restrictions until we have a vaccine or a home-run treatment? That (to me) seems unreasonable given the cost/benefit calculation. Wasn't the original point of the lock-downs simply to make sure the hospitals aren't overwhelmed (because the number of people who will get the virus in the long term will likely more or less be the same)?
     and yes, both sides very fine people, lobbing up to government buildings with guns to make demands, very reasonable, yada yada. 
    Isn't this just "nutpicking" (as mentioned in the original quote) - finding the least sympathetic proponents of the other side and implying that they are emblematic? 
    rhcoop
  • 1 No, I have not seen an expert say that any state is ready NOW.  My familiarity on the experts are limited to the Public Health professionals on the President's Task Force, and Physicians/Public Health professionals that appear on CNN, NBC, etc, and the people behind the IMHE website (UofWasington).  They are universal, in fact IMHE doubled their projections or deaths after easing started.
    2. Actually - I wrote that poorly - I do not believe that.  I should have said, I believe I may have seen experts say there may be communities that may be ready.
    3. On when, future tense, yes.
    4. I've seen experts say now is too early taking those considerations you mention into account.  I've only seen politically motivated individuals make the argument that now is right because of the considerations you mention.
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    tom_g said:
     I believe I may have seen experts say there may be communities that may be ready.

    I don't see this just doesn't concede the point. There is at least some room for debate about doing some easing in some communities. Not everyone who is (generally speaking) "pro-easing" is all "Let's everyone in the world go back to the way things were tomorrow!" - which is one of the major points of the original quote. And, it's not just a bunch of yahoos making even the subtle light-pro-easing argument. There are at least some (as you put it) experts making the case. 
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    Dee said:
    Over 75000 deaths within a couple of months, but sure, seems like a good time to discuss re-opening things, 
    Are you suggesting that we shouldn't ease any restrictions until we have a vaccine or a home-run treatment? That (to me) seems unreasonable given the cost/benefit calculation. Wasn't the original point of the lock-downs simply to make sure the hospitals aren't overwhelmed (because the number of people who will get the virus in the long term will likely more or less be the same)?
     and yes, both sides very fine people, lobbing up to government buildings with guns to make demands, very reasonable, yada yada. 
    Isn't this just "nutpicking" (as mentioned in the original quote) - finding the least sympathetic proponents of the other side and implying that they are emblematic? 
    I’m not giving you the “debate” you’re clearly itching for. 
    Flukes
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    Dee said:

    I’m not giving you the “debate” you’re clearly itching for. 
    I’m not itching for a debate. I’m just frankly surprised I’m getting so much push back from a modest proposal of depolarization and that everyone should try a little more self-reflection when faced with heated / contentious issues.
    rhcoop
  • Push back was solely on the idea that, on this subject, science vs politics is not a legitimate debate.
    Dee
  • HatorianHatorian Dagobah
    Told you I think we had it in December...never had a flu like the one he had

    https://us.yahoo.com/news/evidence-suggests-coronavirus-likely-spreading-154500955.html
    JoshuaHeter
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    tom_g said:
    Push back was solely on the idea that, on this subject, science vs politics is not a legitimate debate.
    With all due respect, this is a worse false dichotomy than “saving lives vs. saving the economy”.


  • DeeDee Adelaide
    Hatorian said:
    Told you I think we had it in December...never had a flu like the one he had

    https://us.yahoo.com/news/evidence-suggests-coronavirus-likely-spreading-154500955.html
    Girl at work was telling me her cousin came back from Europe in early January and was starting to feel unwell on the plane and was then sick for several weeks with what they thought was really bad flu. 
    Hatorian
  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    edited May 2020
    OK let’s bring things back to center a bit:

    A. I think it is unreasonable to expect that people will stay locked up assuming a vaccine takes another year. That’s just not happening in any scenario for various reasons so any good quarantine plan should take this under consideration and plan for some sort of controlled relaxation pre-vaccine because otherwise people are just going to flagrantly violate curfew and the only way to stop them at that point is to call out the national guard, and I’m not certain that the government militarily enforcing curfew (especially this government) is a good idea. So if your quarantine plan does not account for “re-opening” on some level in the next.....4-5 months then your plan is bad and you need a better plan because people, especially Americans, just aren’t going to stay in that long even if it’s good for them. It may not be the best idea medically but you have to plan around the fallibility of humans or you’re not doing it right. 

    B. It’s definitely strawmanning to assume that most people who want to go outside are the morons who get the most visibility on the news. The news media is all about hits and idiots protesting safety measures designed to protect them in the most unsafe ways possible drive a lot of hits. The guys who are like “Bill Gates made the virus in lab” are morons and (thus far) not representative of the majority of the populous. Reasonable discussion does not drive hits which is why you’ll never see people with reasonable arguments on the news. The same is true both ways of course, though there’s certainly fewer morons to prop up on the pro-lockdown side, there are some and that side isn’t “anti-American” for wanting people to not die. 

    C. There is a debate to be had, but it isn’t a even remotely an equal debate. Roughly 2/3 or more of the populous in basically every poll by every pollster is concerned with the idea of opening up too early rather than too late so if your starting point is “maybe we should open up now” you’re in the minority and you need to understand that a lot of people think you are incorrect on the merits. If you think you’re correct then ok let’s have that argument but the onus is on you to convince the majority of America, otherwise lockdown is currently the will of the people at the most basic level of democracy. 

    D. The people currently in favor of opening up right now are not basing their arguments on any amount of science or logic in any ways. Attempting to argue to the contrary is buying into their propaganda. The governor of my state is a ghoul, GA death has increased, not decreased, and is only growing by the weeks, opening up the “bowling alleys and nail salons” is not only moronic and unsafe, it doesn’t even do what he’s lying and telling you it will do. Restaurants here are open, they’re still all doing curbside, no one is eating inside. That’s because 2/3 of Americans are scared they might die, they’re not visiting bowling alleys even if they’re open. The owner of the nail salon can’t stay in business at 1/3 capacity which means they’re going to fail. The purpose of opening up GA right now, as basically admitted by my state’s legislators, is to kick people off unemployment. If people are too scared or too vulnerable to work when work is open, then they get fired, which means they don’t get unemployment. That’s why GA is opening up, it’s not to save the economy, it’s not to help people who need money, it’s to punish poor and disadvantage people. Arguing otherwise isn’t contrarian, it’s counter-factual. 

    E. Some places probably can open up. Alaska has barely 100+ cases, mostly because no one lives near anyone in Alaska so community spread is really hard there. If you live in a really rural area with like 100 people, honestly you might never meet anyone who catches this as long as you never visit a city. Should Anchorage open up? I don’t know, that’s a pretty big city, might cause some problems, but maybe small town in the middle of nowhere is actually fine to do about daily business. Probably town municipalities should determine for themselves if they feel like it’s better to open up or not. They have the best idea of what the “on the ground” numbers look like and if everyone there wants to open it’s sort of up to them to deal with potential consequences. 

    F. More opinion based but arguing about increased suicide potential from lockups seems anti-intellectual to me. Seems to me that being forced to go to work during a pandemic is very depressing and risking the health of yourself and your loved ones is probably very depressing as is watching the death rate of Covid advance to the hundreds of thousands, then the millions. It’s a depressing time, anything we do is going to be depressing, I wouldn’t base my arguments around which plan is going to be more depressing than another plan. Before you put this forth as a talking point do some actual work to determine if this is actually provable with some real data. 

    In conclusion: a lot of very reasonable people have very reasonable arguments about opening up, they have come to these conclusions honestly and I hope have good data to back up their positions. Don’t assume they’re all know nothings who want everyone to die for the dollar. am very open to having this argument with anyone on here who’s like to have it, but do know I will ask you to provide some actual evidence from reputable sources to back up your talking points because I sure as shit have some to back up mine and I’m not interested in a lopsided argument. If you want to have a debate then let’s debate. If you want to talk about the idea of having a debate, get off your ass and let’s have a debate, I care far less about the merits of “people being open to the idea of having a debate”. This is a forum, have the debate.  
    MarciOldGriswold
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    Alkaid13 said:
    The people currently in favor of opening up right now are not basing their arguments on any amount of science or logic in any ways. 
    I can sign off on pretty much everything you say here... except for this. 

    It depends on what you mean by "Opening up right now". 

    If you mean "going back to the way things were in late Feb. / early March"... hardly anyone is making that argument. 

    If you mean (something more like) "lifting some restrictions in some areas so that people who freely choose to break quarantine can do so..." it just seems like hyperbole to say that their arguments are completely devoid of logic or not based at all in science.
  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    edited May 2020
    Sorry I should have clarified that part: I mean anyone who’s saying “let’s just go back to how it was pre-lockdown” right this very moment. Those people are lunatics practicing a form of human sacrifice and should never be taken seriously on anything ever. There aren’t many people espousing that, but there are people in high positions in government espousing that, and that’s extremely concerning but these people are known to be incompetent so I shouldn’t be all that surprised I guess. 
    JoshuaHeter
  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    Also while I’m on the topic, I’d like to say that anyone who’s in favor of “rolling back” regulations of workplaces so that workers can’t report or sue for unsafe working conditions “for the good of the businesses” can go fuck themselves because I’ve for sure seen that topic come up lately and I don’t care for it at all. 
  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    edited May 2020
    More on topic, people should stop moaning about people going to parks. Do you want people to hang out in the mall?! We should be making more parks honestly, this is ridiculous. “Oh man look as these people at the park not social distancing let’s shame them”, motherfucker you’re at the same park! How’d you get that photo otherwise??? Shame people having a mosh pit or some bullshit but let people have their picnics and their hikes. We should make a schedule for national parks so that everyone is allotted time to attend in small groupings. Best way to solve staying at home depression. 

    Stay six feet apart and go for walk, you’ll feel better. Take some allergy meds first though, pollen is crazy right now. 
    JoshuaHetercdrive
  • Yeah, I think consensus is that transmission outdoors is probably quite difficult. 
  • MichelleMichelle California
    Just offering a little reminder. :wink:


    Flukes
  • HatorianHatorian Dagobah
    Apparently my doctor says it lives up to 4 days on surfaces and they have no concrete proof on sun but even if it does help it could still mean surfaces in sun hold it for a day instead
  • FreddyFreddy Denton, Texas
    edited May 2020
    HatorianNoel
  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    Have not yet heard from the office conspiracists about Plandemic fortunately. 
  • Pence’s press secretary tested positive. This is also Stephen Miller’s wife.
    Shortly after one of Trump’s valets tested positive..
    Now one of Ivanka’s assistants has tested positive.

    Maybe the President’s narcissism can work for us if he feels personally threatened by this disease?
  • Teresa from ConcordTeresa from Concord Concord, California
    edited May 2020
  • MichelleMichelle California
    My roommate just tested positive.
    I'm now in quarantine for 14 days, starting today. :neutral:
    FreddyFlukes
Sign In or Register to comment.