Coronavirus 2019-nCov: Political Thread

[SHOCKvalue]

[wufan]

My post with the graph, was to highlight that there will invariably be people who think that a lockdown was unnecessary due to a flattening, reduction, and lack of a personal impact. We know this is how some humans operate. To prove my point, all you have to do is look in the inbox of broadcast meteorologists after they interrupt TV programming to provide information on a tornado warned storm - even those that killed people. A number of people in our society will ***** and moan that they didn't get to watch The Bachelor even though the preempted coverage might have saved lives. Because the tornado didn't hit their house they think the coverage was unnecessary.

The same concept will assuredly happen here as well and likely from the same subset of people.

I said something similar WAY back in early March, but I applied it to both sides. Preconceived biases hit us all equally.

If we lock it down and the curve flattens, everyone will claim victory.

I told you this was overblown!

I told you the lockdown would work!

We currently have a correlation here, however the early antibody testing seems to be pointing towards a disease with much lower lethality that spread very quickly despite the lockdown.

The bizarre natural progression of the virus hitting a max and dissipating everywhere over the same timeline is an equally compelling correlation.

So, everyone gets to be correct, and everyone can claim that the other side either wants people to die or wants to kill the constitution.

I discourage any conclusions from being drawn on any side at present.

[Kung Wu]

"Is isolating AND dying an option?"

-- Marshall Applewhite, leader of Heaven's Gate

[ShockBand]

I hope what appears to be a lower lethality with Covid-19 is true, if so then I would hope in a few weeks we can smartly and carefully (please) start getting businesses opened back up.

I do hope the studies are underway about the things with this virus that seem, at least to me, to be different. It seems to me that Covid-19 does cause more severe cases even in younger and healthier people than would seem to be the case with seasonal flu. Makes me wonder if there are things of note with a person's genetics, the viral load and severity, and things of that nature. I do hope that underneath all the noise of the varying sides yelling at each other that many good and smart people are learning everything we can from all this so we are better prepared next time. I do think getting to observe countries where the response was handled differently (Sweden) and the outcomes will be instructive, and if Georgia opens back up as it seems it will be here in a few days, the outcomes there will be instructive as well.

[wufan]

I hope what appears to be a lower lethality with Covid-19 is true, if so then I would hope in a few weeks we can smartly and carefully (please) start getting businesses opened back up.

I do hope the studies are underway about the things with this virus that seem, at least to me, to be different. It seems to me that Covid-19 does cause more severe cases even in younger and healthier people than would seem to be the case with seasonal flu. Makes me wonder if there are things of note with a person's genetics, the viral load and severity, and things of that nature. I do hope that underneath all the noise of the varying sides yelling at each other that many good and smart people are learning everything we can from all this so we are better prepared next time. I do think getting to observe countries where the response was handled differently (Sweden) and the outcomes will be instructive, and if Georgia opens back up as it seems it will be here in a few days, the outcomes there will be instructive as well.

The lethality is definitely lower than what is being projected. We know that the infection rate is “something” higher than what has been tested for.

One of the unique things about this bug that makes it scary is the apparent infectious nature for a prolonged period prior to showing symptoms.

[pie n eye]

What happened first - private organizations/communities cancelling events or the current government not-really-a-lockdown lockdown? This all just happened in the past 4-6 weeks so the answer is not difficult.

If I remember correctly it was the Ohio governor who kicked off the trend of cancelling things.

It seems like you're trying to say that we should just leave the private sector in charge of our pandemic response. In my opinion that's not a great idea. They don't have access to the necessary information. Even if they did, most (none?) don't have the expertise and knowledge to analyze and formulate a response. Even if they did, none of them have the authority to force others to follow their idea for best course of action.

We may be inching closer to the end of the first wave but I don't think it's the end of the battle. Hopefully now is a time to intelligently restart life while bolstering our defenses and preparing for the next wave so that we can limit casualties without resorting to these extreme measures again or, if we do, for a shorter duration.

The warning signs were there early enough. Other countries have shown that, if we took it seriously earlier, we could have prevented some of the disruption and death we've experienced over the last month or so.

A critical review of the missteps, if any, that led us here should happen at some point. Eventually we need to take what we learned from this situation and be prepared for next time. Turning something like this over to the private sector at large is not the right decision in my opinion.

[SHOCKvalue]

It seems like you're trying to say that we should just leave the private sector in charge of our pandemic response. In my opinion that's not a great idea. They don't have access to the necessary information. Even if they did, most (none?) don't have the expertise and knowledge to analyze and formulate a response. Even if they did, none of them have the authority to force others to follow their idea for best course of action.

Possibly the most inane stance postulated in this entire thread, with respect to serious posts.

Outside of printing monopoly money, and a tiny proportion of scientists employed by various government agencies, literally the mass of the remaining entirety of the virus response is being handled at current by the private sector.

[pie n eye]

Possibly the most inane stance postulated in this entire thread, with respect to serious posts.

Outside of printing monopoly money, and a tiny proportion of scientists employed by various government agencies, literally the mass of the remaining entirety of the virus response is being handled at current by the private sector.

Well, at least you've nailed the smug, self-important tone necessary to make your statements seem definitive.

Of course the private sector is and should be largely involved in the R&D for vaccines, treatments, and testing equipment. But that's not what you were talking about originally.

Your initial question was "What happened first - private organizations/communities cancelling events or the current government not-really-a-lockdown lockdown?". That's what I was referring to in my post. You're veering into an entirely different discussion.

[MelvinLoudermilk]

And there it is.


MSNBC Nicole Wallace on air wonders if there isn’t something good about the virus and millions of unemployed Americans in that in hurts Trump

[pie n eye]

And there it is.


MSNBC Nicole Wallace on air wonders if there isn’t something good about the virus and millions of unemployed Americans in that in hurts Trump

I haven’t watched cable news in years. I prefer to consume news in written form. So, I don’t know who Nicole Wallace is.

Out of curiosity I searched out a video of the moment you mentioned.

She says that there is something tragic, pathetic, ironic that it took a global pandemic to expose the presidents faults - lying to the public and contradicting experts for example. Faults that many people have been constantly pointing out over the last three years. Faults that can be ignored or shrugged off as eccentricities when things are going well but are liabilities during a crisis when we need leadership.

The silver lining isn’t that it “hurts” Trump. The silver lining is that people will see how poorly he’s handled this situation and realize that we need to elect someone competent or at least someone who is willing to admit that they don’t know everything and defer to those with expertise. I don’t care what political party they belong to.

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

And there it is.


MSNBC Nicole Wallace on air wonders if there isn’t something good about the virus and millions of unemployed Americans in that in hurts Trump

I don't think there's anything 'good' about what has happened. And I don't think anyone could have avoided extreme negative consequences in this situation. It's just that our current poor leadership is making problems worse. I could go on with a list, but if you like him, you'll ignore it or attack me for it, and if you hate him, you will agree with me. I'd rather use my time and effort making a difference, seems like people are set in concrete over this issue. You pretty much either love him or hate him. My only other comment is that it seems like, based on how he conducts himself, the number that hate seems to be growing larger. Look at the colapse in his support among elderly. Most of them do not want to be exposed to the virus because they check one or several high risk boxes.

The one thing that has happened is that it has exposed Trump for the poor leader that he is (and for his bad habits). Habits that at least 30% of the population seem to gloss over, dismiss or attack (kind of like the old "Love it or leave it" that was popular in 1970).

I agree with Pie n eye's comment about leadership and political parties.

And by the way, Nicole Wallace was a speechwriter for GW Bush. She is a voice of moderate republicanism, which is pretty much extinct these days.

[wufan]

I’m good with the way Trump has handled this overall.

[Shockm]

I saw this article in the paper. I don't know if it fits here or not as an overreaction or necessary concern, but I wll put this here for discussion. I thought that it was interesting that lawyers forsee this opportunity to sue. Who is the party who is most aggrieved? Does the employer have the most rights, or the worker? The worker could definitely abuse this right, unless the money is their biggest worry. There is no doubt in my mind that the lawyers are prepared to make money through any situation necessary but this wasn't Bradley Pistotnik bringing this up either. lol

Similarly, employers have a range of concerns, such employees taking advantage of the situation or even suing them.

“As this stay-at-home stuff is lifted, I think you’re going to see . . . what I would call this stand-off,” said Sean McGivern, an employment lawyer with Graybill & Hazlewood.

Alan Rupe, an employment lawyer with the Lewis Brisbois firm, said there’s a lot to consider when getting employees back to work during a pandemic.

“There is a huge amount of anxiety on the part of employees and on the part of employers because we’ve never been here before.”

[ShockingButTrue]

I don't think there's anything 'good' about what has happened. And I don't think anyone could have avoided extreme negative consequences in this situation. It's just that our current poor leadership is making problems worse. I could go on with a list, but if you like him, you'll ignore it or attack me for it, and if you hate him, you will agree with me. I'd rather use my time and effort making a difference, seems like people are set in concrete over this issue. You pretty much either love him or hate him. My only other comment is that it seems like, based on how he conducts himself, the number that hate seems to be growing larger. Look at the colapse in his support among elderly. Most of them do not want to be exposed to the virus because they check one or several high risk boxes.

The one thing that has happened is that it has exposed Trump for the poor leader that he is (and for his bad habits). Habits that at least 30% of the population seem to gloss over, dismiss or attack (kind of like the old "Love it or leave it" that was popular in 1970).

I agree with Pie n eye's comment about leadership and political parties.

And by the way, Nicole Wallace was a speechwriter for GW Bush. She is a voice of moderate republicanism, which is pretty much extinct these days.

You're so out of touch, it's no wonder Trump is the President, and rightly considered a Truth Mirror. A mind-reader you ain't.

How can you sit there and repress the fact that the President saved one million lives? After all, you were a noisy gong last March going on and on about the end being nigh... Why can't you give credit where credit is due? Oh, yeah...

Hey, on the same topic, it was in the news the other day that pelosi is switching gears toward an America re-opening policy. What a visionary. If only your President would have thought of such a thing... Oh, wait...

[Shockm]

And by the way, Nicole Wallace was a speechwriter for GW Bush. She is a voice of moderate republicanism, which is pretty much extinct these days.

This is a lie. Nicole Wallace cares zero about conservative, liberal, or moderate causes. She is a total anti-Trumper and is against everything he is for. It matters not what the political subject is or what a political person believes. If it assists the President, she is against it. If it hurts the President, she is for it. A good example is that prior to President Trump, she was for closed borders and now her opinions are that she is against closing the borders.