Red Mosquito

In terms of getting the economy 'started,' how are you possibly going to do that when not only every high-risk or vulnerable person (which is a massive, massive portion of the country) but also every person that lives with a vulnerable or high-risk individual, stays at home? These mandates are widely popular, and that popularity is emanating from concerns about the public health risk. That doesn't mean waiting we're all going to shut ourselves inside until there's a vaccine (which is a strawman that practically no one is advocating for), but it does mean that it's stupid to revert back to some semblance of normal when you don't have the virus even close to under control, and aren't even in the ballpark of having the tools you need to keep it isolated if and when there's an outbreak in your city/state/region.

But again, stripping me of my right to work so that some elderly man with cancer and pneumonia doesn’t catch COVID in his home, seems entirely irrational.

Why? Is your life more valuable than his? What if that old man was your father that you lived with? Not all old people live in homes away from people.

verb_to_trust wrote:

PHATJ wrote:

digster wrote:

PHATJ wrote:

digster wrote:The death count, if anything, is being undercounted.

Based on what information? Everything I’ve seen indicates the opposite.

Take your pick; the revised totals of people who likely caught and died of COVID when it was spreading in the U.S. earlier than expected, massive numbers of nursing home deaths which included people who had not been tested for COVID (NYS alone had to increase their number of nursing home deaths during the crisis by nearly 2,000 just several days ago). During the pandemic, NYC was reporting approximately 200 to 215 deaths at home; typically, that number would be at 20 to 25. That's not from the Young Turks; that's the city's medical examiner. What changed?

What changed? Some people got sick and died. I also have read that suicide numbers have skyrocketed during the lockdown. I’m sure that contributed as well. I haven’t ever said that the virus wasn’t serious. I haven’t ever said people that are at risk should be forced to work, or leave their homes, or do anything. What I am advocating for is for healthy and low risk people to be allowed to live their lives as they see fit with as little government intrusion as absolutely possible. This is not an unreasonable request. It’s actually at the core of American principles.

There is no high risk or low risk. We are all at risk and we are all fucked by our governments horrible response to this situation. Wear it, bitch.

Wrong, fucknugget.

Self wrote:

B wrote:

PHATJ wrote:It should also be mentioned that the practice of social distancing wasn’t designed to (and never promised to) slow mortality rates. It was designed to spread the effects of the virus over a longer period of time in order to not overwhelm hospitals. The total cases and total death numbers may be very similar to what they would’ve been without the shutdown, they will just happen over a longer period of time.

No, that's incorrect. Because if hospitals get overwhelmed and people can't get in when they need care, the death rate goes up from COVID patients and non-COVID patients who didn't get the life-saving treatment that they needed because there wasn't a bed in a hospital for them.

Wasn't the estimate 35 million if we did nothing?

I don't know, but that seems very high.

Orpheus wrote:

But again, stripping me of my right to work so that some elderly man with cancer and pneumonia doesn’t catch COVID in his home, seems entirely irrational.

Why? Is your life more valuable than his? What if that old man was your father that you lived with? Not all old people live in homes away from people.

That old man is my grandfather. That’s why I used it as an example.

hi guys. i'm logging in for the first time today. did i miss anything?

Chris_H_2 wrote:hi guys. i'm logging in for the first time today. did i miss anything?

Kill a lot of old people so I can punch the clock.

verb_to_trust wrote:

PHATJ wrote:

digster wrote:

PHATJ wrote:

digster wrote:The death count, if anything, is being undercounted.

Based on what information? Everything I’ve seen indicates the opposite.

Take your pick; the revised totals of people who likely caught and died of COVID when it was spreading in the U.S. earlier than expected, massive numbers of nursing home deaths which included people who had not been tested for COVID (NYS alone had to increase their number of nursing home deaths during the crisis by nearly 2,000 just several days ago). During the pandemic, NYC was reporting approximately 200 to 215 deaths at home; typically, that number would be at 20 to 25. That's not from the Young Turks; that's the city's medical examiner. What changed?

What changed? Some people got sick and died. I also have read that suicide numbers have skyrocketed during the lockdown. I’m sure that contributed as well. I haven’t ever said that the virus wasn’t serious. I haven’t ever said people that are at risk should be forced to work, or leave their homes, or do anything. What I am advocating for is for healthy and low risk people to be allowed to live their lives as they see fit with as little government intrusion as absolutely possible. This is not an unreasonable request. It’s actually at the core of American principles.

There is no high risk or low risk. We are all at risk and we are all fucked by our governments horrible response to this situation. Wear it, bitch.

Shirley, you can't...



https://www.cleveland.com/coronavirus/2 ... -died.html

PHATJ wrote:

Orpheus wrote:

But again, stripping me of my right to work so that some elderly man with cancer and pneumonia doesn’t catch COVID in his home, seems entirely irrational.

Why? Is your life more valuable than his? What if that old man was your father that you lived with? Not all old people live in homes away from people.

That old man is my grandfather. That’s why I used it as an example.

Stay at Home orders protect people from grandchildren who are unconcerned with their well-being.

WOW MD

more like.. isolate old people so i can FEED MY KIDS

Chris_H_2 wrote:hi guys. i'm logging in for the first time today. did i miss anything?

Just be careful not to tread on Josh

funny how when it wasnt affecting him or his family he was throwing trump in our face and saying four more years get used to it you fucking losers


now he wants everything to go back to how it was cause he and his family are being affected and he doesnt like it

Are we having a serious debate, or are we just trying to post enough to get to post the whiskey gif?

B wrote:Are we having a serious debate, or are we just trying to post enough to get to post the whiskey gif?

...

B wrote:

Self wrote:

B wrote:

PHATJ wrote:It should also be mentioned that the practice of social distancing wasn’t designed to (and never promised to) slow mortality rates. It was designed to spread the effects of the virus over a longer period of time in order to not overwhelm hospitals. The total cases and total death numbers may be very similar to what they would’ve been without the shutdown, they will just happen over a longer period of time.

No, that's incorrect. Because if hospitals get overwhelmed and people can't get in when they need care, the death rate goes up from COVID patients and non-COVID patients who didn't get the life-saving treatment that they needed because there wasn't a bed in a hospital for them.

Wasn't the estimate 35 million if we did nothing?

I don't know, but that seems very high.

Yeah, but I read it somewhere. Don't ask me for sources. Go do research yourself, sheeple.

Monkey_Driven wrote:

B wrote:Are we having a serious debate, or are we just trying to post enough to get to post the whiskey gif?

...

That was 15! Almost there!

tree_ wrote:WOW MD

more like.. isolate old people so i can FEED MY KIDS

It all about narrative, tree_. If they can’t make a comment with any intelligence, they just hurl insults and act like they know better than anybody else.

for ST +1

Peeps wrote:funny how when it wasnt affecting him or his family he was throwing trump in our face and saying four more years get used to it you fucking losers


now he wants everything to go back to how it was cause he and his family are being affected and he doesnt like it

Trump is still going to win the election. After all he’s running against a pedophile.