That works, too. My point is that if it's that much of an inconvenience to wear a mask for however long it takes someone to run their errands, how selfish is that person being?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Government Response To The Coronavirus (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter James Daulton
- Start date
- Status
GoBirds
Footballguy
Hard to have 50 posts in the Shark Pool when you have 41 total but I’m sure if he’s on your side there’s some way to qualify it.That account was started in 2008, seems a long time to hold on to alias account, if it is one.
I thought the 50 post rule was for preventing someone who has been suspended from starting a new thread, rather than posting at all, but I could be mistaken.
Regardless, I’ll avoid that account and the numerous others that fall under that category.
Last edited by a moderator:
So they literally just threw up their hands, even if their first statement was true. Wow, that's impressively inept.
The Commish
Footballguy
There's always an excuse. My favorite illustration of "why to wear a mask" is two people standing in front of each other taking a piss...neither with pants on, one with pants on, both with pants on. I guess they need to have another column for the "they aren't doing it right" where they have the pants on backwards and/or fly unzipped a bit?
It's STILL better than sitting there pissing on each other with no pants on.
squistion
Footballguy
I am not trying to qualify it. Seems to me I have seen posts from both those on the right or left that don't meet the 50 post SP threshold (and I don't think posts from either side have been deleted).
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
And my point was that it would be easier than some countries to control the flow into our borders if we actually wanted to do that.
ETa: you know, actually suspend flights from Europe at the start of this do NY didn't get lit up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
This article compared US deaths to other high income countries:
It’s hard to know what country represents the best comparison, but the US fared poorly even relative to the high mortality countries they studied. Only the UK, Spain and Belgium did worse since the start on the pandemic, but the US is notable for consistently bad performance, with improvements in death rates lagging behind all other OECD countries.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
I am very much in favor of mask wearing, but the biggest issue with masks is most people dont wear them in the most important places to wear them.
College kids arent wearing masks at parties no matter who is president. Family bbqs dont all of a sudden have everybody masked up because the president says so.
Thats why mask mandates havent proven to be saviors. Furthermore you still have people wearing not very good masks thinking they are great because of the carryover fear of masks running out.
And looking at how democrats were behaving early on too, it isnt like they were clammoring for lockdowns and masks. I am old enough to remember Cuomo saying NYC wouldnt be locked down.
If not for a masks4all hashtag, there is a good chance that the CDC and doctors wouldnt have ever reco'd masks.
It isnt like they all started citing a groundbreaking study. In fact the CDC didnt even cite anything for the change. I know that because Osterholm called them out for it in his podcast and actually showed on the cidrap site the cdc guidance and discussed the footnote numerals. None of them were any new studies or data to justify a change.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
Well, if businesses could be fined, then they'd be the controlling agent, to a degree. It'd be sad that it would have to come to that.
There’s some who will never comply, who will never listen. What Biden can do is not only put the health experts out there but also support a consistent message by not contradicting them at every turn. By removing some of the background noise and practicing what they preach, the message can be much more effective. It won’t reach everyone but hopefully enough to see meaningful benefits.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I really don’t know and just guessing - maybe 25-30% max? Total swag on my part. I’m basing that on them not pushing to open things like churches so quickly back in the spring. I was in favor of scholls being open this Fall with reasonable measures. In general, the problem is he just made everything worse. There are plenty of folks who would be wearing masks if he pushed them. Sure, there’s a segment that wouldn’t but every little bit helps and it’s easy to do.
gianmarco
Footballguy
I find it similar to the anti-vaxx movement. Irreparable harm was caused by Wakefield and his fraudulent paper about MMR and autism. It resulted in untold damage and in so much time, money, and effort to disprove something that never existed. But, despite some still clinging to that misinformation, most have been able to see the truth and the course was reversed.
I would hope the same could happen here. Have our scientists/physicians take the lead and give a consistent message that the administration gets behind. One would hope that more people would then get on board, even though it will take time.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Probably not a lot. But to have a clear and cohesive message...consistent from POTUS on down rather than what we have now can’t hurt.
Sammy3469
Footballguy
Goodell's Alias
Footballguy
This isn't a subjective thing. He literally did not shut down travel. He stopped some Chinese citizens from coming here. Nothing else. You can keep repeating your claim, but it won't make it any more true.
GoBirds
Footballguy
He shut down more travel than Biden or any Democrat would have, that should clear it up for you.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
It’s not black-and-white. We can definitely do better, and a consistent, coherent message from the POTUS is a great place to start.
Key points to emphasize IMO:
1. We haven’t turned the corner, and there’s a good chance winter will bring a major strain to our medical infrastructure. Testing supply and PPE production needs to be ramped up. The federal government should coordinate production and expand public health infrastructure.
2. If people don’t comply with simple NPI (distancing, masks, cough and hand hygiene), there’s a good chance activities/businesses will need to be restricted (again). Other countries have shown us collective sacrifice is effective in keeping the number of infections manageable.
3. Don’t expect widespread vaccine availability until mid-2021, at the soonest. Get your flu vaccine in the meantime.
4. Don’t expect a pharmacologic cure either. NPIs are cheap, effective and the only reliable way to minimize the health and economic impact of the pandemic.
5. Economic recovery cannot occur unless the infection is contained to a reasonable extent.
6. Natural herd immunity will not occur quickly enough to justify the additional deaths and debility easing restrictions will cause.
7. Science should be apolitical. We need to trust the experts, realizing advice can change as our understanding of this novel infection increases.
In summary, the pandemic ain’t going anywhere, and our current leadership has failed in just about every conceivable way. Even though we’re off to a rough start, if we accept reality and work together we can right the ship.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
To make sure I understand you correctly, you want a truce with people that laugh at your posts but you also want to continue snarky zingers at other posters?
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
A % of that group might very well listen to trump.
My question wasnt what could trump have done better. That is an easier topic. It was how many fewer deaths would there have been with another president.
I highly doubt the die hards would be listening to a democrat.
There are plenty of anti maskers that vote democrat. Anti vaxxers and anti maskers have a big overlap and they arent just right wingers.
And if we look at who takes them off in their office, when with friends, restaurant, etc I bet that split becomes pretty close to even.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Well, I answered it as best I could - it’s just a guess but in addition to what I mentioned in my previous post, Trump taking this more seriously would have given Republican governors cover for taking it more seriously and putting mask mandates out there, keeping things closed longer and not opening up as quickly.
I mean unless you think that Democratic politicians would have pivoted to more of a Anti-mask position if Trump was more pro-mask all along. I don’t see that having happened but nothing surprises me after the year we’ve had.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Shula-holic
Footballguy
So he kept people from traveling here from the spot of the initial outbreak and that is a bad thing?
moleculo
Footballguy
Some people. Not all, just some. And those that did fly in - there was no quarantine, no isolation in the airports, nothing.
I think that the travel ban was helpful. It bought us time - iirc, Italy/Spain we're about 3 weeks ahead of us in terms of the virus spreading. Unfortunately, we squandered that time by pretending it wasn't going to come here.
GoBirds
Footballguy
Not only that, wait until you see his other post.....yep it’s racist as well according to him.
Last edited by a moderator:
Shula-holic
Footballguy
I don't have a problem with this. It's reasonable to argue the steps to follow up, I just failed to see how it could be a bad thing to at least start with that step, which was highly criticized at the time.
The issue is that he didn't shut travel down entirely from China(but made a huge smoke and mirror show of it, though), and not at all from Europe, which is why NY got hammered so hard at the start of this.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Of course not a bad thing to start with that step. I the issue people have is when the line of dialogue is a simple "well Trump stopped people from coming in from China". For starters it's usually presented in a way that suggests they are saying he stopped all people from China. Secondly, it usually feels like it's presented in a way that suggests we couldn't have done a lot more. I will admit to my biases in interpreting those meanings if they are not there, but I usually hear it from people who believe that we couldn't have done much to prevent the numbers we currently have, which I take issue with.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
It isn't split equally among party lines, but still, most people believe in the utility of masks. And the % has increased over time. Whether D or R, a consistent pro-mask message from the POTUS would certainly help compliance. I've already linked predicted numbers if we mirrored policy from other OECD countries, with estimates from the 10's to 100+ thousand lives saved. Here is a recent poll which breaks down public opinion on mask use:
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
It was criticized because the ban targeted Chinese citizens explicitly, while simultaneously ignoring the risk posed by people with American ties coming from the same high risk areas. There was no reason to make that distinction, other than anti-China/xenophobic rhetoric. If he restricted all travelers from hotspots (with provisions for quarantines to facilitate Americans returning home), he probably wouldn't have received the same criticism. But unless they are uniform across all at risk populations, the efficacy of travel bans is somewhat dubious (as we saw with NYC cases imported from Europe).
Regardless, it's embarrassing the limited travel restrictions are heralded as Trump's greatest contribution to our pandemic mitigation strategy. Clearly, the numbers show that intervention wasn't enough.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Shula-holic
Footballguy
I live in a pretty reliably red area and it's pretty rare to see folks in public without masks. But when you do, if anything is said, it's usually a pretty nasty situation. I've been wearing one since the start, well as soon as I could find one. The hardest part of people believing it here is stories of someone they know or have heard of who caught the virus even though supposedly they wore their mask. People don't seem to get that your mask protects others from you much moreso than protecting you from others. There are a few in that subset though who do get it and are just so self centered they don't see themselves as a threat to other people or simply don't care.
I'll agree I wish it had been even more. But the reaction at the time politically wasn't that. He was criticized for the ban at the time, but in most cases it was not for it not going far enough.
TheMagus
Footballguy
I don't really remember it being highly criticized and if it was that is dumb. We really should have shut down all international travel until we could get a handle on what was already here. And if there were US citizens trying to get back home from overseas, we should have had available and rapid testing as soon as they came into the country and mandatory 2 week quarantines for those folks. I remember back in the beginning there was that cruise ship in Japan where there was an outbreak. And the State Dept overruled the CDC and put all the US citizens on a flight to get home even though there were known positive cases on the flight. I was aghast at the time at how we were handling this. People from all over the world were flooding into the country and we had little to no safety protocols or testing available.
So yea.... Trump banned travel from China for Chinese citizens. That obviously didn't do much since we are sitting at over 8 million positive cases since then.
TheMagus
Footballguy
See this is what is odd to me too when I read these tales about anti-maskers and @Morton Muffley story about his friends in Boston. I do not know a single person that I interact with IRL that is "anti-mask." I live in the suburbs of Philly and we were hit hard early - there is rarely a person without a mask when we go out and about and usually it is someone who has a mask that temporarily took it off and forgot to put it back on.
But here's the thing also..... 3 out of 4 of our parents who live in other areas are pretty Trumpian and usually fall for a lot of the conspiracy stuff that is pushed by the right wing. And they are TERRIFIED by COVID. My mom hasn't been in a public place since early March. My wife's parents refuse to come visit us even if we guarantee we will quarantine for two weeks ahead of time. They aren't that old either - late sixties. My Republican friends in the Philly area are taking this as seriously as anyone. Hell, my Trump loving aunts/uncles-in-law who all live in the south now (South Carolina, Tennessee) are more careful than we are. So these stories about a huge movement to ignore science and that the pandemic is a hoax is just something I have never witnessed IRL and it is confusing to me when I read things on the internet (or the news) about this. I mean there are even a fair number of Trump supporters that post here and I can really only think of one poster who openly scoffs at the pandemic and thinks nothing can be done about it so we should all just run free. But I know it is out there I am just finding it confusing who these people are and where they live.
ETA: You saying you live in a red area and most people are masked confirms everything I have first hand knowledge of as well. That was my point.
Last edited by a moderator:
Shula-holic
Footballguy
Yeah, now granted I live in a suburban area so maybe the rural counties are different. I don't notice it when I go to check on my dad in a more rural area, but then again I'm not in the stores there. I work from home but usually do get out every day to grab some lunch or run a few errands. It's so rare to see someone without a mask generally I remark on it to my wife later. In fact, the past two or three times it's been at the post office. Something about the post office and masks don't match up around here. But this is a county Trump won in 2016 by 50 points, 72/22.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
When you say "highly criticized at the time" are you referring to criticism by the scientific community, by media outlets(including comedians), or by other politicians?
Part of the problem was trump described it as a "travel ban" when it clearly was not. There were "travel restrictions" put in place. This is an important distinction because goods from China were still coming in and those involve people coming in from China to deliver them. And of course Americans coming from China(which is where the whole racism accusations came from). Clearly, there was no travel ban from China.... unless you were a Chinese citizen... that wasn't delivering goods.
But more importantly there is this tale that is weaved that all the experts(I think he referred to them as "brilliant people") were fighting him every inch of the way. The loudest voice of the scientific community at the time against it was the World Health Organization and even they did NOT condemn the US for doing so in the way that is being portrayed many months later. Here is their statement at the time.....
“[W]e reiterate our call to all countries not to impose restrictions inconsistent with the International Health Regulations. Such restrictions can have the effect of increasing fear and stigma, with little public health benefit. So far, 22 countries have reported such restrictions to WHO. Where such measures have been implemented, we urge that they are short in duration, proportionate to the public health risks, and are reconsidered regularly as the situation evolves.”
This narrative that he stood against the world to impose the "Chinese Travel BAN" is wrong on so many levels. The travel restrictions took place on January 31st. By that time Russia, Italy, U.K., India, Philippines, U.A.E., Finland, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Germany, Australia, Canada, Nepal, Vietnam, France, Malaysia, Singapore, Macau, South Korea, and Japan had all recorded COVID cases. American Airlines and several other carriers in North America, Europe, and Asia had suspended ALL FLIGHTS from China before trump had instituted his "travel BAN" on the 31st of January. Some countries had either completely closed their border to China or imposed harsher restrictions already.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
As I remember it the criticism he received was not from the healthcare community and the criticism he received wasn't about it going far enough, it was because it seemed arbitrary. Chinese citizens travel to the US was restricted, but US citizens could go back and forth as often as they like. And Chinese citizens weren't even restricted if they were delivering goods from China(which is a LOT of goods).
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
It's not rocket science. If I am responding to you, that means you weren't part of the "and others" that I decided to ignore. I also didn't decide to ignore people because of snarky comments or zingers like you implied.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
I don't know any anti-maskers either, thankfully. We've also been largely spared from protests and militant groups, despite plenty of big luaus. People are for the most part respectful and keep their politics to themselves.
It's not always great living on an island, but I can't think of another place I'd rather be atm.
Last edited by a moderator:
My wife’s sister, her husband and my MIL all are Trump supporters, typically against the government telling them what to do and easily lock onto propaganda. We worried that they were not going to take it seriously and put our MIL, who lives with them and has several risk factors, at high risk. They fit the profile of an anti-masker but luckily their paranoia is stronger and they’ve taken needed precautions.
I also know of a lot of hard core Trump supporters who are taking it very seriously. The most appropriate thing to say is that not all Trump supporters are anti-maskers but just about every anti-masker is a Trump supporter.
- Status
Similar threads
