OT: Corona virus

[JohnDillworth]

Nice name calling there for now reason. I am definitely not a scarecrow.

I'm not sure if you are kidding or you don't know what a straw man is. start here https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and- ... straw-man/

[JohnDillworth]

I saw the photos taken of the crowded NYC subway

yes, you did see a photo or two a month ago. The situation has been addressed and while not perfect is much better. Some were inconvenienced for the good of many.
The trolley is barreling down the track towards five grandmothers. You can pull the switch and redirect it so that it kills no one. But you have to wear a mask to buy a toaster oven. What do you do?

[22sec]

Even in the army you have different commanders who are going to employ different tactics and different approaches when assaulting or defending, so shouldn’t we accept that there is no way to have some universal strategy when confronting COVID? To continue the military analogy further, what we as individual citizens do in the day to day is akin to what individual units in combat do. A brigade commander can come up with a sound plan to assault an enemy formation, but in the end it’s up to each small unit to maneuver and execute the plan. I don’t see any difference between the battlefield and the fight to slow the spread of COVID. Regardless of what level the decisions are being made, our fight comes down to what we all do within the “orders” we receive.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Nice name calling there for no reason. I am definitely not a scarecrow.

I'm not sure if you are kidding or you don't know what a straw man is. start here https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and- ... straw-man/

I take it that you never have seen the Wizard of Oz nor even Green Acres.

[JohnDillworth]

I take it that you never have seen the Wizard of Oz nor even Green Acres.

Both, many times and even the original show that Green Acres was spun off from, Petticoat Junction plus the movie that the much of the cast of the Wizard of Oz started in prior to their roll in Oz, The Terror of Tiny Town, the world's only musical Western with an all-dwarf cast.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

I saw the photos taken of the crowded NYC subway

yes, you did see a photo or two a month ago. The situation has been addressed and while not perfect is much better. Some were inconvenienced for the good of many.
The trolley is barreling down the track towards five grandmothers. You can pull the switch and redirect it so that it kills no one. But you have to wear a mask to buy a toaster oven. What do you do?

No, you can't make it kill no one, that's the point.

1) It will kill many no matter what. We try to influence that to minimize the death toll.
2) Any and every action we take to minimize the death toll from COVID-19 also has other consequences, and those include deaths and disease other than COVID-19. A more balanced approach with broader vision is better than a narrow, myopic approach.

Consider that NY State nursing home edict. It mandated that patients be taken in (or back in) even if they have COVID-19. Are nursing homes set up to/capable of quarantining patients in an effective manner? None I've ever seen. They don't have the facilities or the resources. But the edict went even farther. It prohibited testing those patients for COVID-19. That point alone is bombastically stupid, the edict in its entirety even more so. The consequences were many deaths, perhaps thousands, among the most vulnerable to the disease.

Was that done on purpose? Of course not. So how could something so obviously stupid be done? Because the officials in charge were thinking too narrowly and too short-sighted. They were thinking about keeping the supply of hospital beds from being overwhelmed. They blew it.

And that example shows a direct COVID-19 consequence. The consequences outside COVID-19 itself (deaths and disease from other causes brought about by actions to address COVID-19) seem utterly beyond the thinking of many officials right now. Not to mention many in the media.

[Cap Mandrake]

We are at or near a tipping point for the "V-shaped" economic downturn and I fear we will drift over to a giant "U-shape" about 4 years wide if we don't do something.

As for the war analogy, it is fairly apt. During the Blitz of London, the Brits sent the kids out to the countryside. We did something similar except we sent all the old people to a hermetically sealed building with the virus INSIDE.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

I saw the photos taken of the crowded NYC subway

yes, you did see a photo or two a month ago. The situation has been addressed and while not perfect is much better. Some were inconvenienced for the good of many.
The trolley is barreling down the track towards five grandmothers. You can pull the switch and redirect it so that it kills no one. But you have to wear a mask to buy a toaster oven. What do you do?

No, you can't make it kill no one, that's the point.

1) It will kill many no matter what. We try to influence that to minimize the death toll.
2) Any and every action we take to minimize the death toll from COVID-19 also has other consequences, and those include deaths and disease other than COVID-19. A more balanced approach with broader vision is better than a narrow, myopic approach.

Consider that NY State nursing home edict. It mandated that patients be taken in (or back in) even if they have COVID-19. Are nursing homes set up to/capable of quarantining patients in an effective manner? None I've ever seen. They don't have the facilities or the resources. But the edict went even farther. It prohibited testing those patients for COVID-19. That point alone is bombastically stupid, the edict in its entirety even more so. The consequences were many deaths, perhaps thousands, among the most vulnerable to the disease.

Was that done on purpose? Of course not. So how could something so obviously stupid be done? Because the officials in charge were thinking too narrowly and too short-sighted. They were thinking about keeping the supply of hospital beds from being overwhelmed. They blew it.

And that example shows a direct COVID-19 consequence. The consequences outside COVID-19 itself (deaths and disease from other causes brought about by actions to address COVID-19) seem utterly beyond the thinking of many officials right now. Not to mention many in the media.

I hope that the order was not done on purpose. But with some people you never know. Describe the Nazi concentration camps to them and some people will joke about them but they will not deny that is what they actually want.

[Lowpe]

A Message to the People of Pennsylvania from Dauphin County Board Chairman Jeff Haste

https://www.dauphincounty.org/news_detail_T14_R309.php

Harrisburg, the State Capitol is in Dauphin County.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

A Message to the People of Pennsylvania from Dauphin County Board Chairman Jeff Haste

https://www.dauphincounty.org/news_detail_T14_R309.php

Harrisburg, the State Capitol is in Dauphin County.

Very nice, thank you.

[JohnDillworth]

For the record nursing homes in NY State are barley regulated. It's the complete wild west. To some extent you get what you pay for but inspections are few and follow large numbers of complaints.......eventually. In the beginning I suspect they thought they were seeing a large number of flu deaths. When the numbers got crazy they probably didn't want to draw too much attention to themselves NY State absolutely failed people in nursing homes. It was the #1 failure and lots of people should be ashamed at what happened. When the time came for my parents they died at home or stayed at home until the last day or two. Most people don't die at home anymore. Not sure how we got there but I suspect it is partly a result of both parents (if there are 2 parents around) in many homes working full or part time. Anyway there is no central party making sure all the nursing homes are talking too each other. Hell, those hospitals were barley talking to each other. The nursing homes hid those deaths. Washington & New York are good examples of what not to do. I hope against hope that other states do a better job of this.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

For the record nursing homes in NY State are barley regulated. It's the complete wild west. To some extent you get what you pay for but inspections are few and follow large numbers of complaints.......eventually. In the beginning I suspect they thought they were seeing a large number of flu deaths. When the numbers got crazy they probably didn't want to draw too much attention to themselves NY State absolutely failed people in nursing homes. It was the #1 failure and lots of people should be ashamed at what happened. When the time came for my parents they died at home or stayed at home until the last day or two. Most people don't die at home anymore. Not sure how we got there but I suspect it is partly a result of both parents (if there are 2 parents around) in many homes working full or part time. Anyway there is no central party making sure all the nursing homes are talking too each other. Hell, those hospitals were barley talking to each other. The nursing homes hid those deaths. Washington & New York are good examples of what not to do. I hope against hope that other states do a better job of this.

Must be a lot of beer or soup if they are barley regulated.

Aren't they inspected and certified once per year? If what you claimed is true about the regulations, why did they cave in to the state demands? Why didn't the nursing homes demand the tests? Isn't there an ombudsman for the patients/residents to complain to?

The nursing homes do not have to talk to each other. They are either indepently operated or are part of a larger group. The nursing homes will talk to their higher authorities but not necessarily talk to each other.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

yes, you did see a photo or two a month ago. The situation has been addressed and while not perfect is much better. Some were inconvenienced for the good of many.
The trolley is barreling down the track towards five grandmothers. You can pull the switch and redirect it so that it kills no one. But you have to wear a mask to buy a toaster oven. What do you do?

No, you can't make it kill no one, that's the point.

1) It will kill many no matter what. We try to influence that to minimize the death toll.
2) Any and every action we take to minimize the death toll from COVID-19 also has other consequences, and those include deaths and disease other than COVID-19. A more balanced approach with broader vision is better than a narrow, myopic approach.

Consider that NY State nursing home edict. It mandated that patients be taken in (or back in) even if they have COVID-19. Are nursing homes set up to/capable of quarantining patients in an effective manner? None I've ever seen. They don't have the facilities or the resources. But the edict went even farther. It prohibited testing those patients for COVID-19. That point alone is bombastically stupid, the edict in its entirety even more so. The consequences were many deaths, perhaps thousands, among the most vulnerable to the disease.

Was that done on purpose? Of course not. So how could something so obviously stupid be done? Because the officials in charge were thinking too narrowly and too short-sighted. They were thinking about keeping the supply of hospital beds from being overwhelmed. They blew it.

And that example shows a direct COVID-19 consequence. The consequences outside COVID-19 itself (deaths and disease from other causes brought about by actions to address COVID-19) seem utterly beyond the thinking of many officials right now. Not to mention many in the media.

I hope that the order was not done on purpose. But with some people you never know. Describe the Nazi concentration camps to them and some people will joke about them but they will not deny that is what they actually want.

I think both RangerJoe and witqs cold do to use some examples of how leaving it all to the States has helped, rather than a Federally mandated mitigation program implemented early.

You're both just shooting digs at NY and not actually talking about the issue, which is a bit of a problem around here. There are many tragedies in this several month period, and a lot of them could have been lessened by an earlier Federal mandate to enforce mitigation measures and set up consistent guidelines for ALL of the States. It's likely the lockdown could have been shorter, the cases less, deaths less and economy less affected overall if these things were tackled by the Federal Government earlier.

Fauci confirmed he advised a shutdown in late February. He also confirmed in an interview that there was " a lot of pushback" about shutting down at that point.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52264860

I mean, obviously, if we had, right from the very beginning, shut everything down, it may have been a little bit different. But there was a lot of pushback about shutting things down back then.

All of this sent Trump to Twitter in a fluster to talk about firing Fauci.

"Fauci was telling people on February 29th that there was nothing to worry about and it posed no threat to the US public at large," it said. "Time to #FireFauci..."


This goes through figures using IHME to show how Federally mandated mitigation could have reduced deaths in the US if the government had imposed measures earlier.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/opin ... ncing.html

On March 16, the White House issued initial social distancing guidelines, including closing schools and avoiding groups of more than 10. But an estimated 90 percent of the cumulative deaths in the United States from Covid-19, at least from the first wave of the epidemic, might have been prevented by putting social distancing policies into effect two weeks earlier, on March 2, when there were only 11 deaths in the entire country. The effect would have been substantial had the policies been imposed even one week earlier, on March 9, resulting in approximately a 60 percent reduction in deaths.

To determine the impact of early interventions, we used growth rates in cumulative deaths calculated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington from the date that social distancing measures were introduced until the predicted end of the epidemic, and applied them to case numbers from earlier points when such measures could hypothetically have been put into effect.

Ok. Open for insults, derogatory comments, refutations based on pure emotion and other usual non-objective tactics.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: witpqs



No, you can't make it kill no one, that's the point.

1) It will kill many no matter what. We try to influence that to minimize the death toll.
2) Any and every action we take to minimize the death toll from COVID-19 also has other consequences, and those include deaths and disease other than COVID-19. A more balanced approach with broader vision is better than a narrow, myopic approach.

Consider that NY State nursing home edict. It mandated that patients be taken in (or back in) even if they have COVID-19. Are nursing homes set up to/capable of quarantining patients in an effective manner? None I've ever seen. They don't have the facilities or the resources. But the edict went even farther. It prohibited testing those patients for COVID-19. That point alone is bombastically stupid, the edict in its entirety even more so. The consequences were many deaths, perhaps thousands, among the most vulnerable to the disease.

Was that done on purpose? Of course not. So how could something so obviously stupid be done? Because the officials in charge were thinking too narrowly and too short-sighted. They were thinking about keeping the supply of hospital beds from being overwhelmed. They blew it.

And that example shows a direct COVID-19 consequence. The consequences outside COVID-19 itself (deaths and disease from other causes brought about by actions to address COVID-19) seem utterly beyond the thinking of many officials right now. Not to mention many in the media.

I hope that the order was not done on purpose. But with some people you never know. Describe the Nazi concentration camps to them and some people will joke about them but they will not deny that is what they actually want.

I think both RangerJoe and witqs cold do to use some examples of how leaving it all to the States has helped, rather than a Federally mandated mitigation program implemented early.

You're both just shooting digs at NY and not actually talking about the issue, which is a bit of a problem around here. There are many tragedies in this several month period, and a lot of them could have been lessened by an earlier Federal mandate to enforce mitigation measures and set up consistent guidelines for ALL of the States. It's likely the lockdown could have been shorter, the cases less, deaths less and economy less affected overall if these things were tackled by the Federal Government earlier.

Fauci confirmed he advised a shutdown in late February. He also confirmed in an interview that there was " a lot of pushback" about shutting down at that point.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52264860

I mean, obviously, if we had, right from the very beginning, shut everything down, it may have been a little bit different. But there was a lot of pushback about shutting things down back then.

All of this sent Trump to Twitter in a fluster to talk about firing Fauci.

"Fauci was telling people on February 29th that there was nothing to worry about and it posed no threat to the US public at large," it said. "Time to #FireFauci..."


This goes through figures using IHME to show how Federally mandated mitigation could have reduced deaths in the US if imposed earlier.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/opin ... ncing.html

On March 16, the White House issued initial social distancing guidelines, including closing schools and avoiding groups of more than 10. But an estimated 90 percent of the cumulative deaths in the United States from Covid-19, at least from the first wave of the epidemic, might have been prevented by putting social distancing policies into effect two weeks earlier, on March 2, when there were only 11 deaths in the entire country. The effect would have been substantial had the policies been imposed even one week earlier, on March 9, resulting in approximately a 60 percent reduction in deaths.

To determine the impact of early interventions, we used growth rates in cumulative deaths calculated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington from the date that social distancing measures were introduced until the predicted end of the epidemic, and applied them to case numbers from earlier points when such measures could hypothetically have been put into effect.

Ok. Open for insults, derogatory comments, refutations based on pure emotion and other usual tactics.

Okay, only recently was a Covid-19 case diagnosed with 20-30 miles from where I currently live which is 15 miles closer to where I lived when there was the shutdown. So why did I have to be in a place where the businesses were forced to close their doors? Tell me that one. Or is it because New York City and New York state really F***ed it up?

Why tell people to stay inside when the new coronavirus is mostly likely to be spread inside?

Why not just protect the most vulnerable?

Why quarantine the healthly people, ruin the economy, and encourage people not to take care of other pressing health concerns?

Where does the US Constitution state: "All of your rights are void if someone declares that there is a pandemic." Huh? Where does it state that? Or in any state constitution?

[JohnDillworth]

lessened by an earlier Federal mandate to enforce mitigation measures and set up consistent guidelines for ALL of the States.

It's May 9th, and President Trump still doesn’t have an adequate national testing strategy.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

The real issue with Cndn meat packing plants (maybe everywhere??) is not even so much the work environment as the the social setting for the workers. These are shitty jobs and the workers are predominantly poorer immigrant populations. These populations are tight knit, often travelling together, socializing together and in many instances sharing cramped accommodations. Language and education only add more problems to efforts to stem the virus.

My German opponent says that is exactly the make-up of meat-packing there also.

Alberta would pretty much have this licked were it not for several large meat plant out-breaks.

Excellent point.

I thought that there were enough American high school dropouts that could do this work so that the US would not have to import un/undereducated people to do this work. Then the worker should be able to understand English, American style.

I understand that in big Canada land that they do have a guest/temporary worker program so they could ensure that those legal temporary/guest workers could understand enough English, Canadian style. One point of emphasis would be for those workers from a warm climate would be that they should procure and wear a good, warm touk.

??? [&:]
Not sure what you are getting at here. Our migrant workers are exactly like your migrant workers - mostly from Mexico and Central America, and if they know any English they got that in their own country. They are willing to do arduous work because in their own country they could not earn as much for the same effort, and most Canadian "unemployed students" would rather sponge off their parents than try to do that difficult work.

It's a question of motivation - the migrant workers mostly send money back to their families while the Canadian students don't really need the money so badly. The (Canadian) ones really motivated to earn money for their education can usually find better paying, less difficult jobs because of their better education.

And these hard working migrants tend to be very tough, quite able to handle the cold with a bit of warm clothing. Mexico has some areas that are cold in winter too, because of elevation. Regardless, since most of the migrant work is in agriculture, they tend to be here in spring and fall, not so much in winter.

What we do have is a policy of treating them like valued people. During this epidemic, we require them to self-quarantine after crossing the border, but we give them enough money to do so because our food supply depends on their work. And all safety standards that apply to Canadian workers also apply to them.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake




Excellent point.

I thought that there were enough American high school dropouts that could do this work so that the US would not have to import un/undereducated people to do this work. Then the worker should be able to understand English, American style.

I understand that in big Canada land that they do have a guest/temporary worker program so they could ensure that those legal temporary/guest workers could understand enough English, Canadian style. One point of emphasis would be for those workers from a warm climate would be that they should procure and wear a good, warm touk.

??? [&:]
Not sure what you are getting at here. Our migrant workers are exactly like your migrant workers - mostly from Mexico and Central America, and if they know any English they got that in their own country. They are willing to do arduous work because in their own country they could not earn as much for the same effort, and most Canadian "unemployed students" would rather sponge off their parents than try to do that difficult work.

It's a question of motivation - the migrant workers mostly send money back to their families while the Canadian students don't really need the money so badly. The (Canadian) ones really motivated to earn money for their education can usually find better paying, less difficult jobs because of their better education.

And these hard working migrants tend to be very tough, quite able to handle the cold with a bit of warm clothing. Mexico has some areas that are cold in winter too, because of elevation. Regardless, since most of the migrant work is in agriculture, they tend to be here in spring and fall, not so much in winter.

What we do have is a policy of treating them like valued people. During this epidemic, we require them to self-quarantine after crossing the border, but we give them enough money to do so because our food supply depends on their work. And all safety standards that apply to Canadian workers also apply to them.

My understanding is that big Canada land, not Little Canada, has a guest worker program where people in another country can apply for a guest worker visa which is good for 10 months. They then have to leave for 2 months before they can return. Those people are not crossing any border illegally, they can report any violations without risk of being fired and/or deported. They should, however, wear nice warm clothing appropriate for any cold climate, hence the reference to the touk. Yes, I know what a touk is.

As far as understanding the local language, any guest worker, any tourist, etc should at least be able to ask questions in the local language. If nothing else, after stating that they want cervesa, they should be able to ask where is the banyo. [8|]

[JohnDillworth]

Florida is not exactly hitting out of the park as far as nursing home mortality. https://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/na ... 21e7b.html
Governor DeSantis seems to think this is funny and in the middle of this crisis calls his state "Gods Waiting Room". funny stuff. Tip of the iceberg as DeSantis has done everything in his power to keep these numbers secret. Luckily, the Miami Herald has been able to pry some of the information loose

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

lessened by an earlier Federal mandate to enforce mitigation measures and set up consistent guidelines for ALL of the States.

It's May 9th, and President Trump still doesn’t have an adequate national testing strategy.

Yes he does. He left it to the states/people as it is their responsibility under the tenth amendment to the US Constitution.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: witpqs



No, you can't make it kill no one, that's the point.

1) It will kill many no matter what. We try to influence that to minimize the death toll.
2) Any and every action we take to minimize the death toll from COVID-19 also has other consequences, and those include deaths and disease other than COVID-19. A more balanced approach with broader vision is better than a narrow, myopic approach.

Consider that NY State nursing home edict. It mandated that patients be taken in (or back in) even if they have COVID-19. Are nursing homes set up to/capable of quarantining patients in an effective manner? None I've ever seen. They don't have the facilities or the resources. But the edict went even farther. It prohibited testing those patients for COVID-19. That point alone is bombastically stupid, the edict in its entirety even more so. The consequences were many deaths, perhaps thousands, among the most vulnerable to the disease.

Was that done on purpose? Of course not. So how could something so obviously stupid be done? Because the officials in charge were thinking too narrowly and too short-sighted. They were thinking about keeping the supply of hospital beds from being overwhelmed. They blew it.

And that example shows a direct COVID-19 consequence. The consequences outside COVID-19 itself (deaths and disease from other causes brought about by actions to address COVID-19) seem utterly beyond the thinking of many officials right now. Not to mention many in the media.

I hope that the order was not done on purpose. But with some people you never know. Describe the Nazi concentration camps to them and some people will joke about them but they will not deny that is what they actually want.

I think both RangerJoe and witqs cold do to use some examples of how leaving it all to the States has helped, rather than a Federally mandated mitigation program implemented early.

You're both just shooting digs at NY and not actually talking about the issue, which is a bit of a problem around here. There are many tragedies in this several month period, and a lot of them could have been lessened by an earlier Federal mandate to enforce mitigation measures and set up consistent guidelines for ALL of the States. It's likely the lockdown could have been shorter, the cases less, deaths less and economy less affected overall if these things were tackled by the Federal Government earlier.

Fauci confirmed he advised a shutdown in late February. He also confirmed in an interview that there was " a lot of pushback" about shutting down at that point.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52264860

I mean, obviously, if we had, right from the very beginning, shut everything down, it may have been a little bit different. But there was a lot of pushback about shutting things down back then.

All of this sent Trump to Twitter in a fluster to talk about firing Fauci.

"Fauci was telling people on February 29th that there was nothing to worry about and it posed no threat to the US public at large," it said. "Time to #FireFauci..."


This goes through figures using IHME to show how Federally mandated mitigation could have reduced deaths in the US if the government had imposed measures earlier.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/opin ... ncing.html

On March 16, the White House issued initial social distancing guidelines, including closing schools and avoiding groups of more than 10. But an estimated 90 percent of the cumulative deaths in the United States from Covid-19, at least from the first wave of the epidemic, might have been prevented by putting social distancing policies into effect two weeks earlier, on March 2, when there were only 11 deaths in the entire country. The effect would have been substantial had the policies been imposed even one week earlier, on March 9, resulting in approximately a 60 percent reduction in deaths.

To determine the impact of early interventions, we used growth rates in cumulative deaths calculated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington from the date that social distancing measures were introduced until the predicted end of the epidemic, and applied them to case numbers from earlier points when such measures could hypothetically have been put into effect.

Ok. Open for insults, derogatory comments, refutations based on pure emotion and other usual non-objective tactics.

Erik,

You are the one 'shooting digs'. Fauci has said, more than once and on video, that Trump did what he asked the first time every time (including Trump not doing things Fauci asked him not to do). And that specifically includes Fauci going back on air to counter the misuse of his answer to a hypothetical question, the very one which you include here.

Your default is 'centralize everything', that you've made clear.