Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

matttyl

Members
  • Content Count

    16,101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by matttyl

  1. “Garbage information”? What was garbage? I specifically said, as has been instructed here when it’s the case, that it was only a rumor. I didn’t say to go buy “two weeks worth of food”. Heck, I didn’t even mention food in my initial post. I said get what you need to get - like I’ll be going to my local bike shop tomorrow to get a few things so my family can still ride our bikes in the backyard. And yeah, I’ll likely stop by our state owned/operated liquor stores to top off reserves.
  2. Dude, I immediately amended the post to change “lockdown” to “shelter in place” or whatever is being done in either CA or PA. I also made zero mention of getting “2 weeks worth of stuff” as you stated. It’s something I heard, and specifically stated it was a rumor at this point. Just didn’t want my fellow Virginia’s to be totally caught off guard.
  3. Understand the mindset brother, I really do. Wish I hadn’t heard it. But at this point with a few other states already doing something similar, might be best to expect one and prepare (if you haven’t) at this point. A week or two ago I would have laughed at the idea, not so much anymore.
  4. That’s all I was trying to convey here. Sorry to give people a possible heads up so they aren’t caught totally off guard. If you haven’t already gotten what you need from work to be able to work from home, get it. If you need something from a “non essential” place, maybe tomorrow is the day to do it. My kid is lactose intolerant, he drinks almond milk. We’ve got enough till the middle of next week right now - I’ll likely guy an extra half gallon now. That kinda stuff, I wasn’t trying to sound some Apocalypse alarm or anything.
  5. Edited above - my bad. But liquor stores are state owned/operated (and closed Sundays already). Also, could be a(nother) run on food stuffs when it goes in force - if you need diapers, formula, milk, bread, yada yada, gas, and haven’t already done so, do it soon.
  6. Sorry, what I heard was “lockdown”, but I’m sure it would be similar to CA or Pennsylvania. Again, I don’t mean to spread fear, and at this point I’m sure we’ve all done what we can to prepare as best as we know how. Take care of yourselves and each other. ETA - Im sure the governor realizes there are enough people with guns in this state that a lockdown wouldn’t go over well.
  7. Virginia people - I don’t want to be one to spread fear, and this is only rumor, but I’m hearing from sources who would know - buy what you need tonight and tomorrow. “Shelter in place” imminent. Edited to replace “lockdown” (which was the term sent to me, sorry about that)
  8. It’s not just “going outside”, no chance people have enough food to last them, or enough money to buy additional food. People will get fed up and go out to work or whatever’s needed to get money to acquire food. If people don’t have an emergency supply of money, they certainly do r have an emergency supply of food and supplies.
  9. I just cut my own hair for the first time in 10+ years. It looks horrible. And I’m much more balding than I had previously thought.
  10. Right from the summary, ”there shouldn’t be a big peak of infections afterwards.” we’re putting a lot of hope in that word “shouldn’t”, especially with a virus we’re still learning about.
  11. Would it be constitutional? Would people comply? Would we have anarchy In the streets? Would it work to stop this (would letting people “out” in a month just mean outbreaks then rather than now)?
  12. Just realized that my math of 2 million deaths using the assumed .6% fatality rate assumes that all ~325m Americans get infected. My bad.
  13. Uh huh. So they were undocumented positives, but have apparently since recovered? Means the same in the end, wouldn’t it? Others have said that we likely have multiple times the current infected amount.
  14. Probably about 50 pages back by now, but someone linked to a study about China’s numbers saying they likely had missed about 86% of those actually infected due to testing limitations. found it-https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/03/13/science.abb3221
  15. So just a shade under 2 million deaths over the next year? With the majority being older or those with pre ex conditions? We have 2.8m US deaths in a given year already - with the majority being older and those with pre ex conditions. Tough question to ask, but will all of these “lockdowns” and the destruction of the economy be worth it when this is all over?
  16. Yes, same page. I’m trying to look at the biggest picture possible, and what we want to have as a society/economy in 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years.....
  17. Exactly what my long post was about.
  18. I’m not sure if this line of thinking/questions fit in this thread or not, but it deals with the economy. And I’ll preface this whole thing by saying, THERE ARE NO EASY ANSWERS HERE. Im a numbers guy, always have been. Work as a life and health insurance agent, so familiar with life expectancy charts, risk, and mortality rates and the like (yeah, I’m a hoot at parties). Please correct any numbers that I might have wrong in the following. From what I’ve read and heard, as testing increases and more people are found to actually have this virus, the computed death rate from it drops. Initially we thought this had a death rate of 4-5%, but as we realized the scale of the infection and just how many people have it it’s dropped to around 1%. It may drop more. That 1% (at least from Italy’s numbers, which I trust more than China’s) has an average age of about 80, and about half have 3+ pre ex conditions of various sorts. These other countries, especially Italy and China, have put themselves on a countrywide lockdown. Like complete shut down. I not only see that as being tough to implement here, but also Yup impossible for Americans as a whole to adhere to. Sure, FBGs (myself included) will listen to the warnings and heed the advice, but I don’t see enough Americans doing so to the point of it being effective nationwide. Looking at the worst case scenarios given by the CDC (and others) for the US, the range presented was between 200k and 1.7m deaths from this. If these have been updated, please let me know. On an average year, the US already has 2.8M deaths - and a chunk of those are from the most susceptible to the virus (older and those with a pre-ex). Being the numbers guy that I am, one of my favorite recent movies has been The Big Short. I’m sure many of you have seen it - amazing cast list and it won quite a few awards. It was also, by and large, very accurate. A line in the movie (yes, said by Brad Pitt) is that for every percent increase in unemployment, 40k people die. I’ve been thinking a lot about that line lately, with our current events. Did a little digging to see where that came from and it’s accuracy, came across this. It’s a podcast talking about that line specifically, and in it a financial journalist for The New York Times and NPR says that’s a “good rule of thumb.” With shutting everything down, we’re talking about 20+% unemployment. If we assume that’s a 17% increase, and that stat is true and holds true through this situation, we’re talking about ~700k people. Here in America, people’s healthcare is tied to their jobs, if they lose their jobs, they lose their healthcare (yes, lots of caveats to that statement). People take their own lives. They take the lives of others with increased crime. Strokes and heart attacks go up. That all has consequences. THERE ARE NO EASY ANSWERS. Where I’m going with this increasingly long post, is that I don’t see the half baked measures we’re taking to stop the spread working with our society. Americans will simply not adhere to a total lockdown for 2+ months (and I’ve heard it could take much longer), and no guarantee that we won’t have outbreaks starting back up late summer when we let kids go back to school, or play baseball/football games. Some doctors have said we need 6-12 months of this self isolation stuff. Won’t happen here. So I don’t see a way around hundreds of thousands dying from this no matter what we conceivably do. I also don’t see a way that our economy isn’t going to be horribly and permanently harmed. Ok, maybe not “permanently”, but we’re talking years if not a decade or longer to fully recover from, and that only starts when things get back to “normal”, whatever that will end up being. Sorry for the long post, wrapping my head around our new reality.
  19. Maybe this is just me, after a few drinks this evening, just being a total nay sayer - but I don’t see us as a country doing enough of this social distancing thing to be effective. At least not effective enough. This virus spreads, extremely fast. And from what I’ve seen it may very well take longer than 2 months. It may be 6. It could be 12. And it may not work as all it take is us starting schools back up in August and football games starting back in September for this thing that we thought we’d beaten spiking back up again with tens of thousands of new cases and we have to do it all over again. I think we’re going to lose hundreds of thousands no matter what we do. Fully with you on the second point.
  20. Something I would have never thought of - but my college roommate is dating an officer in Richmond, VA. She said that domestic calls and runaway kids are through the roof. I asked why, what’s the connection? If you’re stuck in house with your abuser, what do you do?
  21. Honestly, against. If they are given, which they will be, they need to come with enormous strings attached. Like you can no longer buy back your own stock, it needs to be repaid eventually, other safeguards need to be put in place to prevent this ever needing to happen again.
  22. Sounds like a really funny family joke at this point.
  23. Thanks for this, makes me feel better about my 85 year old grandma up there.