OT: Corona virus

[Canoerebel]

It was new to me when I encountered it in 2004. Since then its basically always used positively for one side and negatively to another. So it has significance, to my way of thinking.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive




Yeah that seems much higher than where we are in the UK - in 2018 we had 1.2M over 65s employed and 10.6M inactive. So roughly a 10% employment rate for over 65s.

Would it be perhaps explained by the state pension system here? I don't think there's something similar in the US (but happy to be corrected if I'm wrong)?

As far as I can tell the 'contributions based' national pension scheme is pretty similar in principle. The federal means tested scheme (SSI) seems more stringent - it involves an assessment of health/disability for over 65s that we don't have for Pension Credit in the UK. That gap may be filled by social security schemes at a state level?

I imagine the US posters will have better information of how it works.

SSI is based upon disability and need. If you get more money in than the SSI will pay, you are not eligible for SSI. I understand that SSI will not pay for drug and alcohol addiction itself.

RSDI is disability based upon inability to work and what you paid in FICA taxes. The FICA tax is a general revenue tax, it goes into the general revenue fund.

Social Security payments are a gratuity paid by a grateful nation.

Edited for:

The income tax on employees is to be collected by the employer, who is to deduct the amount from the wages "as and when paid". Section 802 (a). He is indemnified against claims and demands of any person by reason of such payment. Ibid. The proceeds of both taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way.
.
.
.
The argument for petitioners is that the tax moneys are not earmarked, and that Congress is at liberty to spend them as it will. The usual separability clause is embodied in the act. Section 1103.

https://www.ssa.gov/history/supreme1.html

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It was new to me when I encountered it in 2004. Since then its basically always used positively for one side and negatively to another. So it has significance, to my way of thinking.

Actually, it was the 2000 election that gravitas was used like that.[;)]

[Canoerebel]

Ah, thanks.

[Lowpe]

Pretty harsh opinion article on Nursing Homes in NY.

This nursing home disaster is on you, Gov. Cuomo: Goodwin

https://nypost.com/2020/05/05/this-nurs ... o-goodwin/

[Lowpe]

Take this with a huge grain of salt, but it is an interesting discussion of Ferguson's model. I have heard from other sources the modeling software was very weak and a form of it was on github for a while.

Code Review of Ferguson’s Model

https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-revie ... ons-model/

[Canoerebel]

I've barely followed this story until today. Looks grim. Did the governor have options or were his hands basically tied? Did the severity of the outbreak leave him no good choices?

I don't know much about Cuomo, but I'd assume any governor is trying to do his best under difficult circumstances.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've barely followed this story until today. Looks grim. Did the governor have options or were his hands basically tied? Did the severity of the outbreak leave him no good choices?

I don't know much about Cuomo, but I'd assume any governor is trying to do his best under difficult circumstances.

My best guess is to say it never really reached Cuomo, a decision was made down the line probably to save money as nursing homes cost less than hospitals.

You probably could count on one hand the state administered nursing homes that could safely handle positive covid patients.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Pretty harsh opinion article on Nursing Homes in NY.

This nursing home disaster is on you, Gov. Cuomo: Goodwin

https://nypost.com/2020/05/05/this-nurs ... o-goodwin/

I wonder how many lawsuits there will be. Or ADA violations lodged with the US Department of Justice. Or both.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've barely followed this story until today. Looks grim. Did the governor have options or were his hands basically tied? Did the severity of the outbreak leave him no good choices?

I don't know much about Cuomo, but I'd assume any governor is trying to do his best under difficult circumstances.

My best guess is to say it never really reached Cuomo, a decision was made down the line probably to save money as nursing homes cost less than hospitals.

You probably could count on one hand the state administered nursing homes that could safely handle positive covid patients.

Harry S Truman had a sign on his desk "The buck stops here" and maybe some people need to remember that.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've barely followed this story until today. Looks grim. Did the governor have options or were his hands basically tied? Did the severity of the outbreak leave him no good choices?

I don't know much about Cuomo, but I'd assume any governor is trying to do his best under difficult circumstances.

My best guess is to say it never really reached Cuomo, a decision was made down the line probably to save money as nursing homes cost less than hospitals.

You probably could count on one hand the state administered nursing homes that could safely handle positive covid patients.

Harry S Truman had a sign on his desk "The buck stops here" and maybe some people need to remember that.

warspite1

I think that is very unfair. To blame a dead ex-President for the problems with New York nursing homes is wrong and I'm sure Mr Truman didn't mean to imply he would take responsibility for that......

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It is an increasing trend to try and distill your messaging into key words and phrases to enhance reach.

More recently, the winner has to be reducing complex international negotiations and legislation down to three words: "Get Brexit Done"

warspite1

Well the referendum took place in June 2016. In December 2019 there was still endless debate and argument about leaving, remaining, type of Brexit, Referendum 2 (The Sequel), blah blah blah blah

So the message put out was vote for me and we'll "Get Brexit Done".

Whereas the message emanating from the other corner was.... "it's been over 3 years since the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. Since then there has been nothing but argument, counter-argument, chaos and confusion. Vote for me and...I'll allow that wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs to continue for another interminable length of time because I either don't have the mental capacity to make a decision I believe is right, or because I do know what I think is right but will make me lose the election if I make that clear (but don't have the foggiest understanding that not making my position clear will have the same result anyway)."

Right or wrong, distilling your message into a few key words and phrases can be a sensible course of action...[;)]

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Harry S Truman had a sign on his desk "The buck stops here" and maybe some people need to remember that.

Say what you want about Rudy Giuliani, but when you walked into the office of the Mayor of New York, the most prominent thing on his desk was this sign:

"I'm Responsible"

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It is an increasing trend to try and distill your messaging into key words and phrases to enhance reach.

More recently, the winner has to be reducing complex international negotiations and legislation down to three words: "Get Brexit Done"

warspite1

Well the referendum took place in June 2016. In December 2019 there was still endless debate and argument about leaving, remaining, type of Brexit, Referendum 2 (The Sequel), blah blah blah blah

Rightly so. What type of Brexit did the majority vote for?

BINO? No deal? Something in-between?

Worth remembering that no deal Brexit was touted as a complete fantasy by the pro-Brexit camp, when in reality it was only major concessions from the UK that avoided it.

So the message put out was vote for me and we'll "Get Brexit Done".

Perhaps a more accurate version would have been "Brexit at any cost".

See, for example, the situation with the Irish border. Something that was promised in 2016 that would not happen.

Whereas the message emanating from the other corner was.... "it's been over 3 years since the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. Since then there has been nothing but argument, counter-argument, chaos and confusion. Vote for me and...I'll allow that wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs to continue for another interminable length of time because I either don't have the mental capacity to make a decision I believe is right, or because I do know what I think is right but will make me lose the election if I make that clear (but don't have the foggiest understanding that not making my position clear will have the same result anyway)."

That may be your opinion, but a more consultative approach on Brexit may be have been more sensible given the:

- divisive nature of the topic
- stark regional differences in voting and ramifications for the devolved governments (thinking of NI more than Scotland)
- lack of an agreed single vision of Brexit.

Right or wrong, distilling your message into a few key words and phrases can be a sensible course of action...

Sensible for whom?

There are some that would say that it is a gross over-simplification of what is an exceptionally complex issue, with ramifications for the entire country.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It is an increasing trend to try and distill your messaging into key words and phrases to enhance reach.

More recently, the winner has to be reducing complex international negotiations and legislation down to three words: "Get Brexit Done"

warspite1

Well the referendum took place in June 2016. In December 2019 there was still endless debate and argument about leaving, remaining, type of Brexit, Referendum 2 (The Sequel), blah blah blah blah

So the message put out was vote for me and we'll "Get Brexit Done".

Whereas the message emanating from the other corner was.... "it's been over 3 years since the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. Since then there has been nothing but argument, counter-argument, chaos and confusion. Vote for me and...I'll allow that wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs to continue for another interminable length of time because I either don't have the mental capacity to make a decision I believe is right, or because I do know what I think is right but will make me lose the election if I make that clear (but don't have the foggiest understanding that not making my position clear will have the same result anyway)."

Right or wrong, distilling your message into a few key words and phrases can be a sensible course of action...[;)]

This has been the case for a while now. Certain groups can use catch phrases that have power and stick, that end up becoming a defining concept for the public. There is a quiet brilliance in the development of those simple words and phrases.

On the other hand the world is very complex, and others want people to be aware that it's not as easy as a catch phrase, and try to spell out the complexity with some carefully bullet-pointed programs. Many with an eye on the news, aware the complexity of many issues, with the patience and interest, aware of the multiple sides at play, see those longer platforms and actually find some value.

A larger and larger majority just want someone to tell them it's going to be okay. They see a tagline and feel confidence that those behind it will help them return to a ideal normal they envisage, whether or not that has ever actually been normal or ideal.

It really comes down to the increase in information with the rise of the internet. In teaching design I stress the use of increasing visual symbols to stand for words, phrases and ideas, the increasing use of acronyms and abbreviated names and phrases and how that plays a part in distilling the complexity into something everyone can understand quickly and easily, sometimes across languages and borders.

#hashtags are definitely part of this trend, as is the move to Instagram image-based marketing.

People want to feel confident in platforms, and want platforms to feel confident. That can be tricky though, since it's easier to be confident in simple taglines than try to relay confidence in communicating the nuance that is really inherent in the world and it's machinery.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Right or wrong, distilling your message into a few key words and phrases can be a sensible course of action...

Sensible for whom?

There are some that would say that it is a gross over-simplification of what is an exceptionally complex issue, with ramifications for the entire country.

It's a sensible way to sell your platform. People want simple.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It is an increasing trend to try and distill your messaging into key words and phrases to enhance reach.

More recently, the winner has to be reducing complex international negotiations and legislation down to three words: "Get Brexit Done"

warspite1

Well the referendum took place in June 2016. In December 2019 there was still endless debate and argument about leaving, remaining, type of Brexit, Referendum 2 (The Sequel), blah blah blah blah

Rightly so. What type of Brexit did the majority vote for?

BINO? No deal? Something in-between?

Worth remembering that no deal Brexit was touted as a complete fantasy by the pro-Brexit camp, when in reality it was only major concessions from the UK that avoided it.

So the message put out was vote for me and we'll "Get Brexit Done".

Perhaps a more accurate version would have been "Brexit at any cost".

See, for example, the situation with the Irish border. Something that was promised in 2016 that would not happen.

Whereas the message emanating from the other corner was.... "it's been over 3 years since the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU. Since then there has been nothing but argument, counter-argument, chaos and confusion. Vote for me and...I'll allow that wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs to continue for another interminable length of time because I either don't have the mental capacity to make a decision I believe is right, or because I do know what I think is right but will make me lose the election if I make that clear (but don't have the foggiest understanding that not making my position clear will have the same result anyway)."

That may be your opinion, but a more consultative approach on Brexit may be have been more sensible given the:

- divisive nature of the topic
- stark regional differences in voting and ramifications for the devolved governments (thinking of NI more than Scotland)
- lack of an agreed single vision of Brexit.

Right or wrong, distilling your message into a few key words and phrases can be a sensible course of action...

Sensible for whom?

There are some that would say that it is a gross over-simplification of what is an exceptionally complex issue, with ramifications for the entire country.

warspite1

No I wasn't looking for a Brexit debate on this forum. It was a relatively light hearted view on the benefits of a clear, simple message vs a moronic attempt to evade the issue. I make no comment on whether I agree or not - and is certainly far too complex an issue to be written off in a few words - but it resonated with the public and got him re-elected.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: warspite1



Sensible for whom?

There are some that would say that it is a gross over-simplification of what is an exceptionally complex issue, with ramifications for the entire country.

It's a sensible way to sell your platform. People want simple.

warspite1

Thank-you obvert - that was the point I was trying to make.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy



So I can't understand Hans' absolutism because I try to see the truth but have to admit that there are usually things I can't quite figure out in most stories without making a judgement about the character of the actors.

A candid admission of being mired in that grey fog I alluded to.

Don't worry, not meant as an insult as we are all mired in it together. [:)]

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510




You have to understand both sides to see where they're coming from. Right or wrong side, understanding both sides is more important than the correct side. Sometimes there isn't a correct side... you ever have kids...?

You misunderstood my point.

Once you have SEEN both sides what is IMPORTANT is discerning which one is CORRECT, ie....seeing the correct side.

There is ALWAYS a correct side (yes, I am one of those crazies who believes in an absolute reality).

Often we just can't see through the grey fog to discern it.

I am sorry, but that isn't always true.

Yes, it is.