2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Meanwhile I just received a text from a GB his dad passed from Covid. Woke yesterday morning to a text from another GB that his mom passed from Covid. :(
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 (7 Viewers)
- Thread starter James Daulton
- Start date
- Status
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
jm192
Footballguy
Yeah. Leaders gotta lead. Pelosi going maskless in Salons. Cuomo telling people not to have family Thanksgiving, but trying to sneak in his own, this...
Hard to be a general if you won't do something you're asking the troops to do.
caustic
Footballguy
A bipartisan group of Senators (Manchin, Collins, Cassidy, Romney, Warner) unveiled a $908bn stimulus plan this morning. Here's the very rough framework: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EoKcFD5VoAA7caw?format=jpg&name=900x900
The major components are $180bn for state & local governments, $288bn for PPP, and $300/week UI bonuses for 4 months.
The major components are $180bn for state & local governments, $288bn for PPP, and $300/week UI bonuses for 4 months.
BoerumHill
Footballguy
Nearly 4M cases in November; that’s roughly 30% of all US cases were in the past 30 days. Death rate equals another American dying every minute. Tens of millions of US citizens ignored guidelines and traveled to a Thanksgiving gathering, 2.5M by airlines.
Hospitalization data shifted from the CDC to HHS in July. They farmed it out to two private contractors. No standardized forms, stripped the reporting mechanisms, and guess what? The data is now garbage. State totals don’t match county records, private and public hospitals are reporting differently, and then the Feds demanded “report or we’ll pull your Medicaid patients.”
How do you know where the systems are stressed the most? Where do you ship PPE? Who is in on need of increased staffing? Where are the worst hot spot outbreaks right now? No one knows, because it’s a a full on disaster.
Federal system for tracking hospital beds and COVID-19 patients provides questionable data (Science magazine)
Hospitalization data shifted from the CDC to HHS in July. They farmed it out to two private contractors. No standardized forms, stripped the reporting mechanisms, and guess what? The data is now garbage. State totals don’t match county records, private and public hospitals are reporting differently, and then the Feds demanded “report or we’ll pull your Medicaid patients.”
How do you know where the systems are stressed the most? Where do you ship PPE? Who is in on need of increased staffing? Where are the worst hot spot outbreaks right now? No one knows, because it’s a a full on disaster.
Federal system for tracking hospital beds and COVID-19 patients provides questionable data (Science magazine)
Last edited by a moderator:
caustic
Footballguy
McConnell is out with his own stimulus plan now, and there appear to be a whole lot of non-starters for Dems here:
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
-No state/local aid
-Terminating unilateral lending authority for Biden's Fed/Treasury
-Liability shield for businesses, schools, hospitals
-One-month extension of PUA/PEUC unemployment programs; no UI bonuses
-Increased deductions for business meals and entertainment (I think this was a Kudlow thing?)
Last edited by a moderator:
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
I admire his restraint for not including:
-Forfeit presidential election to Trump
Seriously though, just horrible. People are without jobs and hungry and these are his proposals. Not to mention an American dying every minute from Covid. Horrible. I don't know what else to say.
CR69
Footballguy
Once again the pro life party proves they only care about life right up until the point it’s born.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Speaking of government response to the Covid19 - I don't think the Chinese government did the world any favors.
BroadwayG
Footballguy
“China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!”
I believe in Woodward’s recordings Trump started talking about airborne transmission and how bad it was after a conversation with Xi yet didn’t tell the American public about it until much later.
GordonGekko
Footballguy
This is the most complex issue and probably the one Americans will just have to swallow, bitter pill and all. We can't function economically if every other COVID19 situation turns into a lawsuit. And America is the most sue happy place in the entire world.
A real life truism that has always made me laugh is the group that hates lawyers the most are other lawyers. Spending any extended period of time with attorneys is like trying to clean glitter off the kitchen floor with your tongue.
BOTH Cocaine Mitch and Pelosi are at fault here. BOTH refused to get stimulus out over partisan politics/leverage issues. BOTH have no regard for the average American citizen. This is a problem of class divide, not political divide.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
Thank god trump didnt proclaim it was airborne. Doctors would still be fighting against the possibility of it.
Oh wait...
BoerumHill
Footballguy
@FacesOfCOVID
5,206 of our family, friends, neighbors and coworkers across the United States have died of COVID in the past 48 hours
10:02 PM • Dec 2, 2020
5,206 of our family, friends, neighbors and coworkers across the United States have died of COVID in the past 48 hours
10:02 PM • Dec 2, 2020
Along with Austin's genius mayor who took a private jet with a bunch of family, flew to Cabo, and then told everyone to stay home while he was in Cabo.
You just can't make this stuff up.
Being a climate warrior democrat taking a private jet is just icing on the cake.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mookie
Footballguy
We are all on our own - That has been the government response to COVID-19. Thousands die every day due to the federal government's complete abdication of leadership. We are left with a haphazard, localized, and politicized approach to addressing a pandemic where we still can't agree on something as simple and obvious as wearing masks. Community spread is everywhere. There is no containment possible. Hospitals are at capacity. We can only wait until a vaccine is available. What a disgrace.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
As a resident of the Dakotas, I'm pretty happy about Operation Warp Speed. The federal government hasn't done a particularly good job handling covid, but at least they managed to get vaccine development right, which is a really big deal. On the other hand, my state government has been nothing but actively harmful, and my local government hasn't exactly covered itself in glory either. I feel much more injured by my state/local leadership than by anybody at the federal level.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
Huh. That seems like a terrible idea to me. Seems like poor policy for employers to be allowed to tell me I have to show up in person (rather than work from home), provide an unsafe work environment (refuse to enforce a mask mandate and other mitigation strategies), and refuse to perform appropriate contact tracing in the event of an outbreak, then shield them from lawsuits if those policies lead to me getting sick.
The Commish
Footballguy
Well, that's the rub right? I haven't seen the text. Personally, I have no issue with a liability shield for any company who's followed guidelines for what qualifies as doing their best to keep people safe. There are problems with this though. The primary one being our "guidelines" are severely lacking in the consistency and clearness department. I think companies doing as you describe here should be fully subjected to legal action. However, I do believe companies/businesses who are doing everything they can to mitigate should be protected as well. So in my view, if it's just blanket protection (which is what's been suggested as the case....I don't know for sure) it's absolutely not a good idea. If there are criteria and guidelines, then maybe not such a bad idea.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I'm not sure what philosophical ground there is for blaming employers for following the same policies put forward by government policymakers. It would be one thing if we had a mask mandate, contact tracing, and required WFH. But we haven't done that.
And of course, there's also the issue of how you're supposed to demonstrate that you got sick because your employer didn't do contact tracing (not sure why this is an employer thing, but we'll run with it) as opposed to you catching the virus from a trip to the grocery store, gas station, or some other normal part of living your life.
I think it's pretty obviously a bad idea to retroactively hold employers financially accountable for failing to do things that they pointedly weren't required to do, especially when there's no good way to demonstrate that those actions caused harm to any particular individual. And that's just employers. Things get even hairier when you get to schools and hospitals.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly, it gives businesses too much power over the employees. Much of the precautions businesses have put in have been for CYA purposes in case they may be open to liability or being shutdown. Working in retail this entire pandemic, I’ve already seen a lot of those precautions breakdown.
At the beginning of the pandemic, a positive test in the pharmacy led to a shutdown for a few days, a deep clean and quarantine of staff. Now you’re lucky to even find out if a co-worker tests positive even if you’re a close contact.
Take away the possibility of being sued and they might have you keep working while positive if it prevents a shortage of staff. I don’t think lawsuits are appropriate in most cases and I hope we don’t see it happen but putting it in writing is horrible for workers.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
If we're talking about a civil lawsuit, I think the standard is "preponderance of evidence". I don't see why we would should create a blanket shield that forbids me from even attempting to come up with a preponderance. For example, if I literally never leave my house other than to go work in a retail environment, in which the employer refuses to provide some pretty basic mitigation such as require masks, I don't think it's a stretch to call that a preponderance of evidence (i.e. more likely than not) that I got sick at work.
Can every employee demonstrate that the employer's policies led to the infection? Almost assuredly not. Can some? Almost assuredly. The bolded is literally why the court system and civil lawsuits exist; so I can attempt to demonstrate that X happened because of Y, based on a preponderance of the evidence. Seems like bad policy to say I'm not even allowed to try.
Why give employers a blanket shield? By the way, such a shield would also encourage those employers to behave in a more risky fashion going forward.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Because it's nearly impossible for anyone to meet that standard during a global pandemic, and the cost of defending against baseless lawsuits isn't worth it.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Do you think the risk of baseless lawsuits outweighs the risk of legitimate claims where employers put their employees in unsafe conditions?
I belive there was sn FBG that was asked to work in the sales office despite being able to do his job effectively from home, and the office had a significant outbreak. That employer put those people at risk IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Yes. There are about 14.3 million people who could theoretically sue their employer under @Rich Conway's reasoning. Most of those employers muddled their way through epidemic, just like our local, state, and federal policymakers did. Generally, I think we should give folks fairly broad latitude for how they handled a once-in-a-lifetime situation, especially when they were more or less taking their cues from elected leaders.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
I don't disagree with that, but there are certainly cases where poor outcomes were likely the direct result of decisions taken by employers. Those that create unsafe working conditions should have some consequences.
Striking that balance is tough, but blanket protection shouldn't be available for those that didn't believe the science/risk and their employees suffered.
Jackstraw
Footballguy
Complex problem to be sure. Then you have organizations like Tyson were managers were forcing unsafe conditions and making pool bets on how many infections their employees got.
The average footballguy probably has considerable more ability to defend themselves than a lot of low wage workers in the United States. Especially galls me that these are the people who in fact shouldered a lot of the work place risks and employers get to get off scot free. I don't know the details of the bill but I have a sneaking feeling if McConnell's people are are writing it then it skews pretty heavily towards industry/employers.
We are asking employees to risk everything they have, at low wages with no opportunity to seek damages? I dunno mang.
supermike80
Footballguy
Where did the opinion that low wage people are unable to protect themselves at the workplace come from? This is just garbage. I work at a facility that runs the spectrum, high wage salaried, lower wage hourly..and everyone has protocols they need to follow. There isn't a policy that is implemented for the salaried and not the hourly.
Yeah the Tyson example you mentioned(no way to know if it is true, but we will say it is) is certainly a bad situation, but let's not automatically assume that because someone is "low wage" it means they cannot protect themsevles the same as the non low wage. Masks---social distancing---2 top items to comply with. Wage has nothing to do with this concept.
Ugh
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine
Footballguy
I think it was more referring to white color workers allowed to work from home, while those low-paid hourly workers are forced to be on the line, cutting up chickens, etc.
I fall into the former category, but there are lots of my colleagues that fall into the latter one (assembling widgets, not cutting up chickens).
Dickies
Footballguy
I disagree. My wife’s hometown just opened schools the week before Thanksgiving and had 24 cases of Covid. (20 students and 4 teachers). One of the teachers is fighting for her life. All because a vocal minority of parents pressures the district to reopen against the teachers’ wishes. Why should we shield employers from recklessly endangering their employees lives?
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
So L.A. is now going on full lockdown and "cancelling everything". So glad I live in Florida.
Mookie
Footballguy
I see the void of leadership, and outright undermining of the scientific community, at the federal level as the primary driver behind state and local governments being "actively harmful". The lack of clear messaging at the federal level has fostered an environment of mixed messages, amateur theories, and outright falsehoods locally.
Even more harmful is that by sloughing off pandemic response on local governments, the federal government has relinquished any uniform approach to combating the pandemic, resulting in a hodgepodge of rules/regulations that differ from one locality to the next. This lack of uniformity has made it impossible to achieve any level of containment, especially during the spring, as infection rates grew in areas with lax controls. As a consequence of the lack of uniformity, local shelter in place orders and mask mandates have been less ineffective and we have adopted this weird "do what you want" approach.
Mookie
Footballguy
BoerumHill
Footballguy
OWS seems like a mixed bag. Pfizer took no development money, though having a $2Bn preorder with the US government I your pocket seems like a sufficient motivator for a cash laden behemoth. Moderna def would not have gotten there without the $1Bn they took. But they’re nowhere near hitting the target of 300M manufactures doses by the end of January; they’ll have to pull out all stops to have 20M.
The kickoff was a laggard, just think where we’d be if this had been a Q1 initiative. The process was opaque and secretive on the front end which led to widespread distrust of how safe the vaccines will be (I *think* those fears have dissipated somewhat.)
Off on a personal note, looks like I’ll be in the front end of the queue due to my VA affiliation. A lot of Vets are unhappy about that (they don’t like the idea of being guinea pigs) but I’m signed up to get it right away - likely sometime in January. I’m negative for the virus but positive for antibodies, but my GP always tells me to live like I never had it since we haven’t proven how long natural occurring antigens (which trigger the body do make antibodies) will last.
BoerumHill
Footballguy
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Anybody can theoretically sue anybody for anything. These suits would be extremely difficult to win for the reasons you have stated, and therefore my suspicion is only a tiny fraction of those 14.3 million people would bring such a suit. These sorts of cases are typically brought by lawyers operating under contingency fees so anyone with a lousy case wouldn't even be able to find a lawyer to represent him. What makes you think that there would be a deluge of frivolous lawsuits? My expectation is that there would be some frivolous lawsuits mixed in with some meritorious lawsuits, like pretty much every situation in which we hold employers to a reasonable standard of care for their employees.
I also think that employers are less likely to protect low-wage workers because unemployment numbers make replacing them much easier. The fear of litigation keeps them honest. Give them blanket immunity and what’s stopping them from changing their policies and telling employees, if you don’t like it, we’ll find someone who does.
I’m all for legislation that provides businesses protections as long as they make reasonable efforts to follow state, local and CDC recommendations. Blanket protection would likely be a mistake.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This post could have been made by any teacher anywhere in the country that has in-person instruction, and I think it belongs in the "frivolous" category. Opening up K-12 schools was probably the right move, and it certainly wasn't obviously the wrong move in a way that would amount to recklessness.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
Have any of those teachers brought a lawsuit yet? Congress hasn't passed liability protection yet so it seems like they could. But I haven't heard of any such cases.
My expectation would be that a few people would bring cases like this, get thrown out of court quickly, and then everyone else would realize that such lawsuits are unlikely to succeed. Your expectation is that thousands of teachers across the country are going to bring these kinds of lawsuits?
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
I guess just to cut to the chase, I don't believe that Republicans seek liability protection to prevent frivolous lawsuits against corporations. They want it to prevent meritorious lawsuits against corporations.
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
No. But yes. Otherwise we will be plagued for years with litigation.
Wait until cancer lawsuits come around from the cleaning chemicals.
If there is a way to have certain carve outs for a small set of gross negligence issues, that is probably ideal. But if I had to choose between no shield and a shield and that's it, the shield is the better option.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
That's fair.
I'm sure you picked up on this, but I'm coming from the starting point of assuming that most employers have acted reasonably during the pandemic, and that they're mostly not to blame (in a way that we would want to be legally actionable) for harm befalling their employees.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
I’m actually coming from the same place, which is why I think that the number of lawsuits will be manageable. But the lawsuit linked above against Tyson Foods seems to have a lot of merit and should have its day in court.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
But how is that different than virtually every other transaction, for which we don't create blanket shields for one side of the transaction? Most people act reasonably. The ones that don't get sued.
The Commish
Footballguy
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Our union and district were actually pretty smart about this (though I don’t think it was their intention). Multiple times leading up to and during the return to face to face school, they polled teachers about they felt about it. Options were something like
A. I feel very unsafe with this and disagree with F2F
B. I feel somewhat unsafe but understand it’s in the best interest of the community
C. I feel safe but that could change as new info comes in
D. I feel safe and strongly feel we must return to F2F
The poll results were mixed pretty equally among the options. It logically shows this was not a reckless decision. They deliberated, got teacher input and among the staff, their was not a clear consensus against returning. If it was reckless, the staff would have overwhelmingly voted they felt unsafe.
- Status
Similar threads
