Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Big League Chew

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Ksquared said:

I did not realize you were so against abortion....ducks out quickly

What an odd non-sequiter as to my choice to not endanger othee human lives for financial gain.  I can confirm that I have never had an abortion and never will.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jobarules said:

You can live comfortably on 500/wk? I need to move to Canada eh

Robert Schimmel had a bit where he saw those commercials where they said "for just 65 cents a day you can feed a family of four...........where's that?  I might want to move there"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, just a warning, there's a buzzword on this page that will get you suspended.  I'd suggest hiding your post, editing your post, something to save yourself from posting with an alias.

Just my two cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ksquared said:

I did not realize you were so against abortion....ducks out quickly

this right here, is worthy of suspension.  so inappropriate and such obvious baiting.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize for what could definitely be considered insensitive.  I want to keep this thread focused on the COVID developments and my frustration with where this thread has gone the last couple of days has not helped my mental state or decision making.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Has anyone posted this article? Just came across it and it seems very promising angle on the treatment front using already approved drugs:

https://theconversation.com/we-found-and-tested-47-old-drugs-that-might-treat-the-coronavirus-results-show-promising-leads-and-a-whole-new-way-to-fight-covid-19-136789

Edited by Dragons
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I am tired being told I am not a responsible human being or whatever else someone wants to label me with because I do not follow lock step with their opinion that they state as fact.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -fish- said:

I will do whatever is necessary to protect the lives of the vulnerable, because that is what a responsible human being does.  I value human life above money.  

Then you need to read some history about the misery and yes death the great depression caused.  And who suffered it  the worse.  A healthy economy makes long and healthy lives a possibility.   So many other things are going to be negatively affected just in the healthcare sphere, like say infant mortality, life expectancy, and on and on when the bottom trually drops out of our economy. And that's without looking further afield in politics etc.  

It isn't picking money over lives, it is understanding the risks of massive economic disruption.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Then you need to read some history about the misery and yes death the great depression caused.  And who suffered it  the worse.  A healthy economy makes long and healthy lives a possibility.   So many other things are going to be negatively affected just in the healthcare sphere, like say infant mortality, life expectancy, and on and on when the bottom trually drops out of our economy. And that's without looking further afield in politics etc.  

It isn't picking money over lives, it is understanding the risks of massive economic disruption.  

The depression was not a deadly virus that could be avoided by simple measures.   

When someone you know dies of this, you may think differently about the people that infected them through their irresponsiblity.  The repeated statements of "i'm willing to take the risk" are abhorrently selfish.  I don't care about their risk.  I care about the others who they are affecting.   

Edited by -fish-
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I just got called to jury duty. 🤣

  • Laughing 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, -fish- said:

The depression was not a deadly virus that could be avoided by simple measures.   

When someone you know dies of this, you may think differently about the people that infected them through their irresponsiblity.  The repeated statements of "i'm willing to take the risk" are abhorrently selfish.  I don't care about their risk.  I care about the others who they are affecting.   

If they are infecting others does it not imply the others are also taking risks? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, prosopis said:

LOL I just got called to jury duty. 🤣

That's awesome.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

I want my state to reopen several businesses because we are nowhere near capacity. Like not even sniffing capacity. We have a hospital at State Fair Park that has a 500-600 bed capacity that has zero patients. It is supposed to take patients once hospitals reach 80% capacity. 

There is always the possibility of a spike and that some restrictions would have to be brought back. Waiting two weeks doesnt eliminate that as a chance. 

And these should more than likely be done regionally anyway, just like the closings should have been done regionally. 

We had an election in our state where 400,000 people voted in person and it didnt move the needle one bit. 

They cant even say that it caused a single case. It happened April 7th. One of the questions they ask people that tested positive here is if they voted in person in the election or worked at it. 

So far of all the thousands of cases in the state since then only 52 have said yes. They havent linked any of those 52 together via the election as far as I know. No reports of location xyz and cases 1,9,12 all having been there at the same time, etc.

Now luckily public pressure has caused some easing and hopefully we can keep opening more and keep the numbers steady or increase them, but stay far away from capacity. 

Which state? 

Is this your criteria for reopening?  Having a hospital with 0 used beds that was supposed to be used once hospitals reach 80% capacity?  

Fauci expressed concerns with states opening too soon. The white house guideline was that we get to the point where new cases are decreasing for an extended period of time and we can test thoroughly, find cases quickly and do contact tracing to prevent spread.  That's what I think many of us have been saying. Are you there now?

Can we trust the number of reported cases?  There's been discussion of some states pressuring doctors not to report cases as Corona for political reasons. I have heard similar concerns about people over reporting. This shouldn't be political but it apparently is. 

The arguments in favor of waiting to reopen aren't just about being cautious.  The first states to reopen will have people flooding to them from nearby states.  Imagine if you could get a haircut 30 minutes away or wait until your state opens next month.  That's a real decision for Massachusetts residents near Maine. Imagine that you or your kid are in an area that's experiencing a surge. Wouldn't you at least consider getting out of there and going somewhere that's supposedly safe?  That's how this spreads - people think they're symptom free and spread it to others without knowing it. 

The first states to reopen should be overly cautious for public health reasons, but I'm worried that they're being under cautious by rushing it and I'm worried that they've been manipulated to do so by bad actors or political agendas.

How confident are you that it's safe to reopen right now?  Confident enough to take a small risk with your life?  Confident enough to take a bigger risk with someone else's? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Our area of Northwest Austin is suburban with parts quite rural. Greenbelts and parks weave through hills and create some isolated pockets with lots of space and greenery between houses. Two miles away is a highway, where there have been homeless encampments. Things change from upper scale and beautiful to more urban and strip mall-ish there, and there are usually panhandlers and people with obvious problems when you get to that demarcation. Of course, from time to time, those characters venture into the greenbelts and it’s too common to find litter and signs of camps. 

I don’t have details, but there was just a report on a neighborhood app of an armed robbery in a pleasant neighborhood not far from here, in the opposite direction of where things get dicey.

One had to figure people would get desperate as the crisis perpetuates. I’ve been locking the side gates to our yard, and it’s fenced, and we have cameras all over, but worrying. 

Also hear from friends that there were signs of an encampment less than a half a mile or less from here.

Have to worry that as more people run out of means they’re going to go hunting.

Edited by Mr. Ham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, jobarules said:

If they are infecting others does it not imply the others are also taking risks? 

Some people are essential and have to work.   People that want to go out for a beer are not.   Sad that you don't understand this yet.  The "open up everything" justaflu people are endangering others unnecessarily.   You asked if I'm willing to stay home 12-18 months.  My answer is yes.  It won't be ideal, but I'll do it if it means preventing other people from watching their loved ones suffer and die.   It's hard for me to believe that there are people that think otherwise.

Edited by -fish-
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, prosopis said:

LOL I just got called to jury duty. 🤣

Hey, it's five bucks a day and lunch, right? Not too shabby ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hot Diggity Dog said:

Then you need to read some history about the misery and yes death the great depression caused.  And who suffered it  the worse.  A healthy economy makes long and healthy lives a possibility.   So many other things are going to be negatively affected just in the healthcare sphere, like say infant mortality, life expectancy, and on and on when the bottom trually drops out of our economy. And that's without looking further afield in politics etc.  

It isn't picking money over lives, it is understanding the risks of massive economic disruption.  

I love how the Governor of my state (Colorado) has handled this. I didn't vote for the guy, but he was on the ball early and has stayed true to what needs to be done. He moved us from Stay at Home to Safer at Home this week, which protects me and other vulnerable people, but it allows more businesses to open. He has made it clear he will watch the numbers and if they look good, (when you look at what Stay at Home did for us, it worked) he will open more. He has talked about how retail will open here with restrictions and how bars and restaurants could open later in May. It gives people hope, but still makes it clear people need to do their part or it is back to Stay at Home.

Now will the people do it? My initial observation is people are stupid and won't. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Ham said:

Our area of Northwest Austin is suburban with parts quite rural. Greenbelts and parks weave through hills and create some isolated pockets with lots of space and greenery between houses. Two miles away is a highway, where there have been homeless encampments. Things change from upper scale and beautiful to more urban and strip mall-ish there, and there are usually panhandlers and people with obvious problems when you get to that demarcation. Of course, from time to time, those characters venture into the greenbelts and it’s too common to fund litter and signs of camps. 

I don’t have details, but there was just a report on a neighborhood app of an armed robbery in a pleasant neighborhood not far from here, in the opposite direction of where things get dicey.

One had to figure people would get desperate as the crisis perpetuates. I’ve been locking the side gates to our yard, and it’s fenced, but worrying. 

Also hear from friends that there were signs of an encampment less than a half a mile or less from here.

Have to worry that as more people run out of means they’re going to go hunting.

A lot of people would say that is an excellent reason to buy guns. I'd say that this shows the problem with not having a social safety structure so people don't starve or go homeless.
If enough people otherwise buying expensive guns donated food and necessities for an equal amount that problem might be resolved in the short term.
Longer term it may be prudentt to make other, more structural changes

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, msommer said:

Hey, it's five bucks a day and lunch, right? Not too shabby ;) 

Which is more than I am getting from unemployment.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, prosopis said:

Which is more than I am getting from unemployment.

You could see it as your own private true crime series playing out in front of your very eyes. Probably a lot better than day time tv (though not with Netflix' production standards and likely a lot less action and bad dialogue)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

Which state? -WI

Is this your criteria for reopening?  Having a hospital with 0 used beds that was supposed to be used once hospitals reach 80% capacity? That isnt my only criteria. It simply illustrates that not only is the state not sniffing capacity as a whole it shows that even in our worst county (which has over 50% of the state's cases) isn't even near capacity. Since there are many hospitals in the county and all of them are below 80%. 

Fauci expressed concerns with states opening too soon. The white house guideline was that we get to the point where new cases are decreasing for an extended period of time and we can test thoroughly, find cases quickly and do contact tracing to prevent spread.  That's what I think many of us have been saying. Are you there now? Our testing numbers have been increasing quite a bit. We are testing over 90% negative(at least last I checked) so I am confident in the testing. We dont need to be where anybody can get a test any time. 

Can we trust the number of reported cases?  There's been discussion of some states pressuring doctors not to report cases as Corona for political reasons. I have heard similar concerns about people over reporting. This shouldn't be political but it apparently is. Our states hospital system is actually driving the reporting. They went public on their own and have full participation from all hospitals. I don't think that is a concern. 

The arguments in favor of waiting to reopen aren't just about being cautious.  The first states to reopen will have people flooding to them from nearby states.  Imagine if you could get a haircut 30 minutes away or wait until your state opens next month.  That's a real decision for Massachusetts residents near Maine. Imagine that you or your kid are in an area that's experiencing a surge. Wouldn't you at least consider getting out of there and going somewhere that's supposedly safe?  That's how this spreads - people think they're symptom free and spread it to others without knowing it. We can create all sorts of what ifs when we are paranoid. If we get too many people from illinois coming up for whatever reason we can always adjust and have tons of excess capacity to do so. Haircuts are not something I advocate for opening since I don't care. Been getting my hair cut with a #2 clipper setting for over 20 years so it isnt something I ever think about. They are not on the initial list from what I understand. 

The first states to reopen should be overly cautious for public health reasons, but I'm worried that they're being under cautious by rushing it and I'm worried that they've been manipulated to do so by bad actors or political agendas. Ummmm...ok? 

How confident are you that it's safe to reopen right now?  Confident enough to take a small risk with your life?  Confident enough to take a bigger risk with someone else's? To reopen everything and encourage people to go back to what they were doing, reopen? Yeah not confident, obviously. But to reopen quite a few industries while maintaining the rules being discussed, I am 100% confident that waiting two weeks is no different than opening said businesses tomorrow. Waiting two weeks does absolutely nothing but maybe make some people feel better. And even then I doubt it would, I think they would be asking for two more weeks. I mean we still have counties without a single case and bordering counties of some of those only have 1-2 cases. Its insane to have businesses in those areas getting ruined because some people in Milwaukee are nervous. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, msommer said:

A lot of people would say that is an excellent reason to buy guns. I'd say that this shows the problem with not having a social safety structure so people don't starve or go homeless.
If enough people otherwise buying expensive guns donated food and necessities for an equal amount that problem might be resolved in the short term.
Longer term it may be prudentt to make other, more structural changes

I agree with you and have empathy. Think there is going to be an increase in crime over the next several months as means deplete for tens of millions. It’s a scary reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, prosopis said:

LOL I just got called to jury duty. 🤣

I read that as call of duty at first glance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Governor Brad Little - Idaho.  Phase 1 of 4 opens tomorrow

6 hrs · 

‪More than 30,000 Idaho small businesses will receive Idaho Rebound cash grants, a $300 million investment in small businesses. No other state is putting up a larger amount from the Coronavirus Relief Fund to help small businesses with cash support!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Getzlaf15 said:

Governor Brad Little - Idaho.  Phase 1 of 4 opens tomorrow

6 hrs · 

‪More than 30,000 Idaho small businesses will receive Idaho Rebound cash grants, a $300 million investment in small businesses. No other state is putting up a larger amount from the Coronavirus Relief Fund to help small businesses with cash support!

Good, they should carefully be going back to work for sure. 63 fatalities in a state with 1.7 million residents. Those 63 deaths are real people with families. I also would posit they have at least 63 deaths in 6 weeks for many other causes. I am a fully social distance, flatten the curve proponent. And the stay at home order saved lives there for sure. But there are 30 million people unemployed in the country now, and those numbers do not jive. No one in Idaho should be collecting unemployment. Get it going.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

I am 100% confident that waiting two weeks is no different than opening said businesses tomorrow. Waiting two weeks does absolutely nothing but maybe make some people feel better.

I did my best to present an honest, middle ground approach because i agree that we are close to ready to get back and i agree that we need to get back as soon as possible.  I don't think you're being dishonest with me, i just think you're badly misunderstanding the situation and if this is your opinion then your public support is gambling with other people's lives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

 

I did my best to present an honest, middle ground approach because i agree that we are close to ready to get back and i agree that we need to get back as soon as possible.  I don't think you're being dishonest with me, i just think you're badly misunderstanding the situation and if this is your opinion then your public support is gambling with other people's lives. 

No you didn't.

You first tried to oversimplify what I said by turning it into a broad "open back up" and then attempted to politicize the completely obvious statewide data, twice

Then you let your bias enter into your statements and now are acting as if you have a thorough understanding of the situation in my home state where I check the data daily as well as have plenty of friends that can share with me how things are going in their hospitals.

And now you are making silly statements about gambling with people's lives. You have zero intentions of ever having genuine discussion about things where I live or educating yourself about it.  

Middle of the road and honest is not how I would describe your post. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

Good, they should carefully be going back to work for sure. 63 fatalities in a state with 1.7 million residents. Those 63 deaths are real people with families. I also would posit they have at least 63 deaths in 6 weeks for many other causes. I am a fully social distance, flatten the curve proponent. And the stay at home order saved lives there for sure. But there are 30 million people unemployed in the country now, and those numbers do not jive. No one in Idaho should be collecting unemployment. Get it going.

We've been at 5-25 new cases per day for three weeks.   We locked down pretty quickly.  A lot of the damage was done early in the Sun Valley resort area.  60% of the counties have five cases or less.  71% of cases are in 4 of the 66 counties.   We've had drive up testing with 2-3 day response for a month.

Edited by Getzlaf15
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers march on at Covid worldometers.  86,000 new cases; 5,800 deaths.  Most notable numbers for new cases besides the U.S. are the U.K., Russia, and Brazil.  Some significant percentage increases across Africa - Ghana, Nigeria, Sudan, and Chad.

CNN had an article on higher numbers in Sweden, which apparently did not socially distance as others did.  Deaths per million: Denmark - 78; Finland - 38; Norway - 39; Sweden - 256.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, -fish- said:

I will do whatever is necessary to protect the lives of the vulnerable, because that is what a responsible human being does.  I value human life above money.  

What's your take on health insurance with all of this?

Without a job, many people lose health insurance. 

Without health insurance, many people die.

So do we save most people from COVID-19 to have others die from a slew of illnesses they couldn't get treated because they didn'thave health insurance?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, eoMMan said:

What's your take on health insurance with all of this?

Without a job, many people lose health insurance. 

Without health insurance, many people die.

So do we save most people from COVID-19 to have others die from a slew of illnesses they couldn't get treated because they didn'thave health insurance?

I haven't had insurance since Obamacare b/c of the price hike thanks to it...

Edited by hispeedthinmint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

No you didn't.

You first tried to oversimplify what I said by turning it into a broad "open back up" and then attempted to politicize the completely obvious statewide data, twice

No, i didn't, but i understand how it might seem that way.  And I didn't criticize you for saying that you don't care about haircuts because you cut your own hair, because I understand your point even though it sounds self centered. 

 

1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

Then you let your bias enter into your statements and now are acting as if you have a thorough understanding of the situation in my home state where I check the data daily as well as have plenty of friends that can share with me how things are going in their hospitals.

No, i didn't.  I don't know what's going on in your home state at all.  I know what's happening in my home state, which is one of the worst hit.  I know our governor talked about Maine reopening and whether Massachusetts residents would go to Maine for a haircut, and his answer was no at first, and then he backtracked when he realized it wasn't a hypothetical, but a statistical inevitability.  

1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

And now you are making silly statements about gambling with people's lives. You have zero intentions of ever having genuine discussion about things where I live or educating yourself about it.  

I didn't say that you were gambling with people's lives because of where you live. I specifically said it because you said you were 100 percent confident that waiting two weeks wouldn't matter and that it would do absolutely nothing. 

I stand by the statement. 

If you had zero new cases this week, then waited two weeks, and hadn't had a single new case in those two weeks, that would be massively different than where you are right now. So two weeks would make a big difference.  

But that's an unreasonable bar. If you had two weeks of declining numbers, then you'd be ready to reopen.  According to the white house recommendations and Dr. Fauci. 

But that's not the case. 

In fact, Wisconsin just reported their largest single day jump in new Coronavirus cases today.  

334 people tested positive today.  That's up from 331.

Remember that the white house recommendation is 14 days of declining numbers. 

Feel free to claim greater local area knowledge if you actually have it, but please at least be honest about it. 

Edited by bostonfred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, I-ROK said:

WHO praises Sweden for how it handled the virus by not shutting down. 

Can't wait to hear the spin from the left on this one 

First, you're in the wrong thread for politics, and you're definitely in the wrong thread for political jabs. Take it to the political forum, please.

Second, you are misstating the praise for Sweden.

The WHO did not specifically praise Sweden's decision to not shut down -- they praised Sweden's nationalized health care system for its early response and for ramping up testing, along with their social distancing directives.

If your argument is that the USA should do the same thing -- despite our lack of nationalized health care, our lack of early response, our haphazard roll out of testing, and our lack of a national social distance directive -- that's fine. But such a discussion would almost inevitably turn political, and as such I would suggest that it also belongs in the political forum.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the tent hospitals that were expensively built to provide services to an expected crush of COVID-19 patients are scheduled for closure, having seen few patients:

New York is shutting down two tent hospitals that didn’t see a single coronavirus patient, having spent $350 million in federal taxpayer money to plan and build temporary facilities. The only field hospital that saw patients, at Javits Center, will close Friday after treating 1,000 patients in the 4,000-bed facility. 

Chicago’s pared-back, $64 million, 500-bed hospital at McCormick Place has treated only 12 patients. 

Detroit’s 1,000-bed convention center hospital has seen just 36 patients and is scheduled for closure.

Philadelphia will close its 200-bed temporary hospital in two weeks. It has never had more than six patients at a time.

New Jersey’s four field hospitals totalling 1,000 beds have treated 346 patients.

The temporary hospital that was set up in the New Orleans convention center is averaging 100 coronavirus patients.

The Navy’s 1,000-bed USNS Comfort will leave Manhattan this week to return to its home port of Norfolk, having treated just 182 patients.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Judge Smails said:

Most of the tent hospitals that were expensively built to provide services to an expected crush of COVID-19 patients are scheduled for closure, having seen few patients:

New York is shutting down two tent hospitals that didn’t see a single coronavirus patient, having spent $350 million in federal taxpayer money to plan and build temporary facilities. The only field hospital that saw patients, at Javits Center, will close Friday after treating 1,000 patients in the 4,000-bed facility. 

Chicago’s pared-back, $64 million, 500-bed hospital at McCormick Place has treated only 12 patients. 

Detroit’s 1,000-bed convention center hospital has seen just 36 patients and is scheduled for closure.

Philadelphia will close its 200-bed temporary hospital in two weeks. It has never had more than six patients at a time.

New Jersey’s four field hospitals totalling 1,000 beds have treated 346 patients.

The temporary hospital that was set up in the New Orleans convention center is averaging 100 coronavirus patients.

The Navy’s 1,000-bed USNS Comfort will leave Manhattan this week to return to its home port of Norfolk, having treated just 182 patients.

That's good. The Safer at Home orders seem to have worked and our hospitals didn't become overloaded like in Italy.

  • Like 6
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JbizzleMan said:

That's good. The Safer at Home orders seem to have worked and our hospitals didn't become overloaded like in Italy.

Exactly. Let’s remember that when a second wave hits so we don’t turn into Italy this fall/winter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Judge Smails said:

Most of the tent hospitals that were expensively built to provide services to an expected crush of COVID-19 patients are scheduled for closure, having seen few patients:

New York is shutting down two tent hospitals that didn’t see a single coronavirus patient, having spent $350 million in federal taxpayer money to plan and build temporary facilities. The only field hospital that saw patients, at Javits Center, will close Friday after treating 1,000 patients in the 4,000-bed facility. 

Chicago’s pared-back, $64 million, 500-bed hospital at McCormick Place has treated only 12 patients. 

Detroit’s 1,000-bed convention center hospital has seen just 36 patients and is scheduled for closure.

Philadelphia will close its 200-bed temporary hospital in two weeks. It has never had more than six patients at a time.

New Jersey’s four field hospitals totalling 1,000 beds have treated 346 patients.

The temporary hospital that was set up in the New Orleans convention center is averaging 100 coronavirus patients.

The Navy’s 1,000-bed USNS Comfort will leave Manhattan this week to return to its home port of Norfolk, having treated just 182 patients.

Great news!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, msommer said:

A lot of people would say that is an excellent reason to buy guns. I'd say that this shows the problem with not having a social safety structure so people don't starve or go homeless.
If enough people otherwise buying expensive guns donated food and necessities for an equal amount that problem might be resolved in the short term.
Longer term it may be prudentt to make other, more structural changes

Why not both? I want my guns to defend when the need arises and at the same time I support those who can be helped economically. But these homeless camps don't always exist due to purely economic reasons. Some inhabitants make a conscious choice, and others are pushed there by other laws. In FL we have many large camps of largely sex offenders who flock here because the climate makes camping and squatting 365 days a year a feasible option when laws push them out of other housing options.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ron Swanson said:

Why not both? I want my guns to defend when the need arises and at the same time I support those who can be helped economically. But these homeless camps don't always exist due to purely economic reasons. Some inhabitants make a conscious choice, and others are pushed there by other laws. In FL we have many large camps of largely sex offenders who flock here because the climate makes camping and squatting 365 days a year a feasible option when laws push them out of other housing options.

Maybe more of a political topic, but what percentage of homeless people do you believe choose that lifestyle voluntarily?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Courtjester said:

I love how the Governor of my state (Colorado) has handled this. I didn't vote for the guy, but he was on the ball early and has stayed true to what needs to be done. He moved us from Stay at Home to Safer at Home this week, which protects me and other vulnerable people, but it allows more businesses to open. He has made it clear he will watch the numbers and if they look good, (when you look at what Stay at Home did for us, it worked) he will open more. He has talked about how retail will open here with restrictions and how bars and restaurants could open later in May. It gives people hope, but still makes it clear people need to do their part or it is back to Stay at Home.

Now will the people do it? My initial observation is people are stupid and won't. 

 

I live in Colorado and didn't vote for Polis but his handling of this has been great.  I have been out and about everyday of the lockdown as my job is essential.   My anecdotal impression is the majority of people do and will.  The Denver Metro area is a lot different than it was March 1st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tri-man 47 said:

CNN had an article on higher numbers in Sweden, which apparently did not socially distance as others did. 

Sweden has not mandated social distance but it is done anyway by the majority voluntarily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most are looking towards Sweden as a window into the health consequences of not mandating a lockdown. But I think the economic impact is also important to look at. How many jobs were saved? How much was saved in stimulus money that didn’t have to be given? Certainly an interesting case study that may provide us and other countries a path forward.

Reality is that future waves of this virus will need to look more like Sweden and it’s going to be important to see what they did and take notes so that we can be better next time.

This isn’t an endorsement of their strategy but a cautionary tale that this virus likely isn’t going away anytime soon and we need to prepare to fight it while keeping most things open.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, top dog said:

There  has to be a happy medium in all of this though.  I'm a proponent of "Stay at Home".  I believe it was necessary and has helped keep the hospitals from being overwhelmed.  My family and I take it very seriously and have done everything we can to mitigate our risk.  That being said, I also believe it is time to open things back up.  WITH SOME PRECAUTIONS.  I'm not an advocate of just "business as usual" openings.  But we HAVE to do something.  These businesses are suffering to a point where some just aren't coming back.

I know 4 people that have died of COVID in April.  For comparison, I have known 0 people my entire life that have died of the flu.

I also have friends that can't work.  My daughter was out of work as soon as Ohio shut it down and did not receive a lick of unemployment benefits until this week.  I know a young lady who is a single mother of 2.  She is a hair dresser.  With no job and no daycare, I have NO IDEA how she is keeping it together.  I have a friend who owns a tattoo parlor.  He is being devastated.  Unable to work.  Ohio hasn't allowed 1099 unemployment filers until recently.  I know he has had no income.  My brother has a company that has been shuttered due to the virus here and in India.  He has been struggling to get help.  He couldn't get any loans until recently because of his 1099 status vs. bigger companies.  They wouldn't even let him file an application until May 15th which at that point they had ran out of money.  He did get something this week, so that is good.  But over a month with nothing hurts anyone.

My wife and I have been lucky to keep working.  I'm from home, she still has to go into her job, but the bills are being paid, the lights are on.  My 19 yr old son works in grocery.  He has offered to help his older sister with his savings as he knows she is not working.  My wife and I have been able to help her out.  But there is a lot of people out there who have no one to help them.  And the unemployment systems have just been overwhelmed, the food banks are overwhelmed.  I HAVE EXPERIENCED FINANCIAL RUIN IN THE PAST.  IT IS HORRIBLE.

So I am good with opening things back up.  Putting in some basic safeguards to help.  But the reality is, staying home until we have a vaccine is the best approach for avoiding the virus.  Just not the best approach for avoiding killing our economy and people's livelihoods.

I feel like the people who believe this to be overblown and not necessary are folks that haven't had the virus hit them or someone close to them.  Especially the "Fake News, Fake Virus" folks I see on facebook.  I also feel like the people who say "Keep it all shut down!" are folks that haven't had the financial struggles hit them or someone close to them. 

I don't have all the answers, but I know the only way we figure this out is by finding some type of middle ground.

 

Yup, I completely agree with you...the answer is definitely somewhere in the middle.  I too, have been at least blessed that I can continue to work and get paid through this...so no worries of not eating or paying bills.  But I have been away from my family for 6 months for work, was supposed to come home end of May for a whole month before finishing my last 5 months overseas.  Now because of this damn virus I may have to wait a whole year before I see my wife/kids again.  So definitely not a "minor inconvenience."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Biff84 said:

Most are looking towards Sweden as a window into the health consequences of not mandating a lockdown. But I think the economic impact is also important to look at. How many jobs were saved? How much was saved in stimulus money that didn’t have to be given? Certainly an interesting case study that may provide us and other countries a path forward.

Reality is that future waves of this virus will need to look more like Sweden and it’s going to be important to see what they did and take notes so that we can be better next time.

This isn’t an endorsement of their strategy but a cautionary tale that this virus likely isn’t going away anytime soon and we need to prepare to fight it while keeping most things open.

In the past couple of days the Swedish national bank (Riksbanken) laid out two scenarios for Sweden's economy. One with a GDP loss this year of 6.9% and the orther with 9.7%

link.

Quote

The International Monetary Fund predicted earlier in April that Germany and the U.K. will see their economies contract by 6.5% and 7% this year, respectively. France is expected to see a 7.2% contraction, Spain an 8% contraction and for Italy to see its economy shrink 9.1%.

Sweden’s neighbors Finland and Denmark, which also imposed lockdowns, are also expected to see their economies contract by 6% and 6.5%, respectively.

If this holds true following Sweden's strategy in dealing with pandemics will not bring economic gain.

Edited by msommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, I-ROK said:

WHO praises Sweden for how it handled the virus by not shutting down. 

Can't wait to hear the spin from the left on this one 

Please don't let this thread be political. We have an entire forum for that. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Terminalxylem said:

Maybe more of a political topic, but what percentage of homeless people do you believe choose that lifestyle voluntarily?

Probably is so I will answer your question and then see myself out.  The truth is, I don't know, but I have interacted with several here in FL that are homeless by choice, and so my comment is based purely on limited personal observation.  Now, it may also be that they just choose to say they are homeless by choice as a defense mechanism but I've seen a few examples of them refusing shelter even during events like hurricanes that make me believe it to be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ron Swanson said:
8 hours ago, Terminalxylem said:

Maybe more of a political topic, but what percentage of homeless people do you believe choose that lifestyle voluntarily?

Probably is so I will answer your question and then see myself out.  The truth is, I don't know, but I have interacted with several here in FL that are homeless by choice, and so my comment is based purely on limited personal observation.  Now, it may also be that they just choose to say they are homeless by choice as a defense mechanism but I've seen a few examples of them refusing shelter even during events like hurricanes that make me believe it to be true.

In my experience, none. Nobody sets out with a goal of becoming homeless. That is not anyone’s plan to start.

Please don’t mistake that seeing a snapshot of someone going through a train wreck has given you insight into their journey of how they got there. You wouldn’t read the back cover of a book & conclude you now knew the full story of what the author was trying to convey.

A small minority of street people choose to live on the streets. If you were privy to the trauma they have experienced since they became homeless, that would actually seem like a rational choice.

It is my choice to spend the remainder of my life working to ameliorate conditions for friends living in the street. I have five years experience working directly with the homeless in NYC, to the point where it has become my lifestyle, and hopefully soon, my livelihood. I have a not inconsiderable base knowledge on this subject and would love to share with you folks.

This isn’t the right thread to do that in, though. Feel free to DM or start a thread, I’d love to continue this conversation.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, bostonfred said:

In fact, Wisconsin just reported their largest single day jump in new Coronavirus cases today.  

334 people tested positive today.  That's up from 331

Yep. 85 new cases in brown county, stemming from an essential business.

When it jumped to 331 two days later it was 170. There is a lot of daily variance. 

We are also now averaging something like 45% more tests per day.

Age of positives has trended lower with the expansion of testing, which has obvious implications re: the curve. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.