(04-08-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:45 PM)Cyniclone Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:35 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:30 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]But, you don't mind perfectly healthy people dying in a matter of 2 weeks?
We have to take risks every day. The risk of a perfectly healthy person getting infected and then dying is one we have to be willing to take at some point. I mean, there are lots of ways a perfectly healthy person can die, and yet, until this one, we’ve never shut down our whole economy because of them.
We are talking about probabilities though. This would have shutdown our economy either way; if hundreds of thousands of people die off, how do you think people would react?
That's an aspect people seem to forget: This isn't a matter of an entire country raring to go back to their pre-COVID life immediately but are being held back by malevolent forces. Even if you issued an unqualified all-clear signal tonight, most businesses and consumers are either going to tread very slowly or continue shutdown protocol if they think there's a reasonable threat of increased spread. This isn't going to be an on/off switch, it's going to be a very slowly moving dimmer switch.
If that is the case, then we probably don't need sweeping shutdown orders, and should manage our approach much more locally.
The states are catching up with localities, businesses and individuals that were on the leading wave of social distancing measures. They had to make sweeping orders to shut down the ones packing the beaches at spring break.
The only countries experiencing success in dampening the curve without overarching shutdown measures are those that got WELL ahead of the pack on testing. We did not do that. We can't apply early prevention initiatives in the middle of the storm. That ship done sailed.
That’s just it, Giles. You’d make a decision that you feel is best for you and your employees. But, let others decide what’s best for them, as well. I’m not even suggesting we should start playing MLB or NBA games right now. And, if they chose to do so, I’m not likely to attend. But, if my buddies and I want to get together for a pickup game of hoops, or if a church of 50 people wanted to start meeting together again, they should have the freedom to do so, if not now, at least by the middle of next month.
(04-08-2020 01:00 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]That’s just it, Giles. You’d make a decision that you feel is best for you and your employees. But, let others decide what’s best for them, as well. I’m not even suggesting we should start playing MLB or NBA games right now. And, if they chose to do so, I’m not likely to attend. But, if my buddies and I want to get together for a pickup game of hoops, or if a church of 50 people wanted to start meeting together again, they should have the freedom to do so, if not now, at least by the middle of next month.
I don't trust other people. Did you see how packed our beaches were? Have you been to Home Depot? This is with social distancing measures in place.
We could assume all of these people are not sick (very unlikely), but a large portion of them are symptomatic. And even if it wouldn't hurt me (who knows, but I do have asthma), it could be family members, it could be my office manager with an autoimmune disease, it could be someone I don't know at all.
One, i don't trust people at all to be smart about it (look at the number that want business as usual), but even with social distancing, healthy people are spreading this virus to people that may not be able to handle it. As a healthy person, you could be out spreading it to people that wouldn't survive it.
And that is already killing our medical professionals, imagine if things were normal.....Is that fair to them?
(04-08-2020 01:00 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]That’s just it, Giles. You’d make a decision that you feel is best for you and your employees. But, let others decide what’s best for them, as well. I’m not even suggesting we should start playing MLB or NBA games right now. And, if they chose to do so, I’m not likely to attend. But, if my buddies and I want to get together for a pickup game of hoops, or if a church of 50 people wanted to start meeting together again, they should have the freedom to do so, if not now, at least by the middle of next month.
So you and your 9 buddies playing pick up basketball, say one of you is a carrier of the virus and infects the rest of you. You bring that back to your families and one of those fmaily members attends that church of 50 people and they bring it home to their families...and one of their family members runs out to the mall or the grocery store and infects 30 or 40 more people. Ending things early or letting people do what ever the heck they want just invites a rebound and
months more of shutdown.
(04-08-2020 01:26 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:00 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]That’s just it, Giles. You’d make a decision that you feel is best for you and your employees. But, let others decide what’s best for them, as well. I’m not even suggesting we should start playing MLB or NBA games right now. And, if they chose to do so, I’m not likely to attend. But, if my buddies and I want to get together for a pickup game of hoops, or if a church of 50 people wanted to start meeting together again, they should have the freedom to do so, if not now, at least by the middle of next month.
So you and your 9 buddies playing pick up basketball, say one of you is a carrier of the virus and infects the rest of you. You bring that back to your families and one of those fmaily members attends that church of 50 people and they bring it home to their families...and one of their family members runs out to the mall or the grocery store and infects 30 or 40 more people. Ending things early or letting people do what ever the heck they want just invites a rebound and months more of shutdown.
My point is that 6 months from now, the same thing could happen. So, where is the line?
(04-08-2020 12:33 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:30 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:19 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]Screw it. Let’s keep the shutdown indefinitely. I don’t want to see anyone get sick, ever.
But, you don't mind perfectly healthy people dying in a matter of 2 weeks?
We have to take risks every day. The risk of a perfectly healthy person getting infected and then dying is one we have to be willing to take at some point. I mean, there are lots of ways a perfectly healthy person can die, and yet, until this one, we’ve never shut down our whole economy because of them.
Correct. I'm a pretty healthy person. I am pretty confident that statistically I have a better chance of getting hit by a car and dying while I am on one of my jogs around the neighborhood that Governor Northam still allows me the privilege of enjoying or hit by one of the still running HRT buses on the way to the grocery store that Governor Northam still allows the privilege of staying open than I have of dying from the Chinese virus. I understand the chance of dying from the virus is not zero. I am willing to take that risk.
(04-08-2020 01:28 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:26 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:00 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]That’s just it, Giles. You’d make a decision that you feel is best for you and your employees. But, let others decide what’s best for them, as well. I’m not even suggesting we should start playing MLB or NBA games right now. And, if they chose to do so, I’m not likely to attend. But, if my buddies and I want to get together for a pickup game of hoops, or if a church of 50 people wanted to start meeting together again, they should have the freedom to do so, if not now, at least by the middle of next month.
So you and your 9 buddies playing pick up basketball, say one of you is a carrier of the virus and infects the rest of you. You bring that back to your families and one of those fmaily members attends that church of 50 people and they bring it home to their families...and one of their family members runs out to the mall or the grocery store and infects 30 or 40 more people. Ending things early or letting people do what ever the heck they want just invites a rebound and months more of shutdown.
My point is that 6 months from now, the same thing could happen. So, where is the line?
By that time we would be more prepared. We would not have medical shortages. We might have a vaccine. Better treatment options may be discovered.
(04-08-2020 12:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:29 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]“How the CDC and FDA Wrecked our Economy”
https://reason.com/2020/04/08/how-the-cd...e-economy/
That makes the point. We failed 3-4 months ago because we were treating it like some china virus that we didn't have to worry about. If we would have prepared 3-4 months ago, we wouldn't have needed such drastic social distancing measures. But, we didn't take it serious until a week before it became an issue. Because we werent prepared, we had to take drastic measures to combat it and it wrecked the economy for the time being.
Our doctors and nurses are dropping like flies......and thats with social distancing measures.
I'll bite. What could we have done 3-4 months ago that would have prevented the need to distance?
(04-08-2020 01:30 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:30 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:19 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]Screw it. Let’s keep the shutdown indefinitely. I don’t want to see anyone get sick, ever.
But, you don't mind perfectly healthy people dying in a matter of 2 weeks?
We have to take risks every day. The risk of a perfectly healthy person getting infected and then dying is one we have to be willing to take at some point. I mean, there are lots of ways a perfectly healthy person can die, and yet, until this one, we’ve never shut down our whole economy because of them.
Correct. I'm a pretty healthy person. I am pretty confident that statistically I have a better chance of getting hit by a car and dying while I am on one of my jogs around the neighborhood that Governor Northam still allows me the privilege of enjoying or hit by one of the still running HRT buses on the way to the grocery store that Governor Northam still allows the privilege of staying open than I have of dying from the Chinese virus. I understand the chance of dying from the virus is not zero. I am willing to take that risk.
But it isn't just about you....it is about every single person you come into contact with who has an equal right to health, wealth, and success that you do. We are all interconnected in attacking this. We can either shelter in place and let this run its course in the safest way possible or do herd immunity and let millions die. Do you want to run the risk that you are not as healthy as you think you are, or that your kid or grand kid has some hidden health issue and dies because you want to go to the beach or simply can't wait to take that trip to Home Depot? I sure don't
FWIW, I do think if the bureaucracies hadn't screwed up testing, we probably would not have had the need for the lock downs we have had. But, of course, with the power hungry government officials, I'm guessing we probably would have had some anyway.
(04-08-2020 01:32 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]By that time we would be more prepared. We would not have medical shortages. We might have a vaccine. Better treatment options may be discovered.
What if we don't have vaccines or better treatment? Then what? We just stay locked down until the government tells us they have approved a vaccine for us, and they give us a number to line up and get the vaccine?
I know many disagree with me, and I'm ok with that, but to me, our response to this virus poses a far greater threat to me than the virus itself. The speed at which so many are willing to just let the government strip us of our rights in the name of "keeping us safe" blows my mind. I really wonder if some would be totally ok with it, if the government just locked us in our homes, dropped food off at our doors, and told us they'll let us know when it's safe to go out to play again.
(04-08-2020 01:38 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:30 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:30 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:19 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]Screw it. Let’s keep the shutdown indefinitely. I don’t want to see anyone get sick, ever.
But, you don't mind perfectly healthy people dying in a matter of 2 weeks?
We have to take risks every day. The risk of a perfectly healthy person getting infected and then dying is one we have to be willing to take at some point. I mean, there are lots of ways a perfectly healthy person can die, and yet, until this one, we’ve never shut down our whole economy because of them.
Correct. I'm a pretty healthy person. I am pretty confident that statistically I have a better chance of getting hit by a car and dying while I am on one of my jogs around the neighborhood that Governor Northam still allows me the privilege of enjoying or hit by one of the still running HRT buses on the way to the grocery store that Governor Northam still allows the privilege of staying open than I have of dying from the Chinese virus. I understand the chance of dying from the virus is not zero. I am willing to take that risk.
But it isn't just about you....it is about every single person you come into contact with who has an equal right to health, wealth, and success that you do. We are all interconnected in attacking this. We can either shelter in place and let this run its course in the safest way possible or do herd immunity and let millions die. Do you want to run the risk that you are not as healthy as you think you are, or that your kid or grand kid has some hidden health issue and dies because you want to go to the beach or simply can't wait to take that trip to Home Depot? I sure don't
I guess I'm just not convinced of this "millions will die" or because I go to Home Depot it has any effect on anyone else. These doomsday predictions are just not verifying. As Giles said, once the restrictions are lifted, a large percentage of the population will continue to live in fear and mental health issues like PTSD, OCD, and schizophrenia will likely linger for a generation. Not sure why the rest of us have to pretend to have all these mental health issues once this peaks and declines.
(04-08-2020 01:32 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:29 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]“How the CDC and FDA Wrecked our Economy”
https://reason.com/2020/04/08/how-the-cd...e-economy/
That makes the point. We failed 3-4 months ago because we were treating it like some china virus that we didn't have to worry about. If we would have prepared 3-4 months ago, we wouldn't have needed such drastic social distancing measures. But, we didn't take it serious until a week before it became an issue. Because we werent prepared, we had to take drastic measures to combat it and it wrecked the economy for the time being.
Our doctors and nurses are dropping like flies......and thats with social distancing measures.
I'll bite. What could we have done 3-4 months ago that would have prevented the need to distance?
Having tests to actually test people. Then if you test positive, you can stay away.
(04-08-2020 01:42 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]FWIW, I do think if the bureaucracies hadn't screwed up testing, we probably would not have had the need for the lock downs we have had. But, of course, with the power hungry government officials, I'm guessing we probably would have had some anyway.
(04-08-2020 01:32 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]By that time we would be more prepared. We would not have medical shortages. We might have a vaccine. Better treatment options may be discovered.
What if we don't have vaccines or better treatment? Then what? We just stay locked down until the government tells us they have approved a vaccine for us, and they give us a number to line up and get the vaccine?
I know many disagree with me, and I'm ok with that, but to me, our response to this virus poses a far greater threat to me than the virus itself. The speed at which so many are willing to just let the government strip us of our rights in the name of "keeping us safe" blows my mind. I really wonder if some would be totally ok with it, if the government just locked us in our homes, dropped food off at our doors, and told us they'll let us know when it's safe to go out to play again.
Think of all the money we have poured into HIV over the last 40 years. There is still no vaccine and it took 30 years to even get to the point where someone of average income can contain it.
(04-08-2020 01:38 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]But it isn't just about you....it is about every single person you come into contact with who has an equal right to health, wealth, and success that you do. We are all interconnected in attacking this. We can either shelter in place and let this run its course in the safest way possible or do herd immunity and let millions die. Do you want to run the risk that you are not as healthy as you think you are, or that your kid or grand kid has some hidden health issue and dies because you want to go to the beach or simply can't wait to take that trip to Home Depot? I sure don't
Then, you can stay home. When the risk of leaving your house is zero, I'm sure the government will let you know. I don't want to force anyone out of their homes. But, I'm uncomfortable with forcing people to stay in them.
Listen, this is not really about me. I like my family. I enjoy the time with them. We have everything we need and more. Heck, I even enjoyed 9 holes of golf with my son this morning. But, the idea of just trusting the government to make all of these decisions for me....I'm just not comfortable with that.
(04-08-2020 01:44 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]Having tests to actually test people. Then if you test positive, you can stay away.
But, you know, the same "experts" who screwed up the testing (CDC), are the same ones who are now informing our government officials on when it's safe to reopen. I'm not sure I'd trust a bureaucratic agency like the CDC to make me a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, let alone when it's safe for me to shoot hoops with my buddies.
(04-08-2020 01:44 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:32 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:29 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]“How the CDC and FDA Wrecked our Economy”
https://reason.com/2020/04/08/how-the-cd...e-economy/
That makes the point. We failed 3-4 months ago because we were treating it like some china virus that we didn't have to worry about. If we would have prepared 3-4 months ago, we wouldn't have needed such drastic social distancing measures. But, we didn't take it serious until a week before it became an issue. Because we werent prepared, we had to take drastic measures to combat it and it wrecked the economy for the time being.
Our doctors and nurses are dropping like flies......and thats with social distancing measures.
I'll bite. What could we have done 3-4 months ago that would have prevented the need to distance?
Having tests to actually test people. Then if you test positive, you can stay away.
3 months ago the Chinese hadn't even given us the info to develop a test. 4 months ago nobody outside of China even knew about the virus. And while the CDC certainly isn't perfect, they have certainly been vindicated in not using the Chinese/WHO tests.
(04-08-2020 01:50 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:44 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 01:32 PM)EverRespect Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2020 12:29 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]“How the CDC and FDA Wrecked our Economy”
https://reason.com/2020/04/08/how-the-cd...e-economy/
That makes the point. We failed 3-4 months ago because we were treating it like some china virus that we didn't have to worry about. If we would have prepared 3-4 months ago, we wouldn't have needed such drastic social distancing measures. But, we didn't take it serious until a week before it became an issue. Because we werent prepared, we had to take drastic measures to combat it and it wrecked the economy for the time being.
Our doctors and nurses are dropping like flies......and thats with social distancing measures.
I'll bite. What could we have done 3-4 months ago that would have prevented the need to distance?
Having tests to actually test people. Then if you test positive, you can stay away.
3 months ago the Chinese hadn't even given us the info to develop a test. 4 months ago nobody outside of China even knew about the virus. And while the CDC certainly isn't perfect, they have certainly been vindicated in not using the Chinese/WHO tests.
There has been talk about corona viruses for years. We sat on our hands. Even fired pandemic staff.
(04-08-2020 01:42 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]FWIW, I do think if the bureaucracies hadn't screwed up testing, we probably would not have had the need for the lock downs we have had. But, of course, with the power hungry government officials, I'm guessing we probably would have had some anyway.
(04-08-2020 01:32 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]By that time we would be more prepared. We would not have medical shortages. We might have a vaccine. Better treatment options may be discovered.
What if we don't have vaccines or better treatment? Then what? We just stay locked down until the government tells us they have approved a vaccine for us, and they give us a number to line up and get the vaccine?
I know many disagree with me, and I'm ok with that, but to me, our response to this virus poses a far greater threat to me than the virus itself. The speed at which so many are willing to just let the government strip us of our rights in the name of "keeping us safe" blows my mind. I really wonder if some would be totally ok with it, if the government just locked us in our homes, dropped food off at our doors, and told us they'll let us know when it's safe to go out to play again.
The issue with that logic is that it assumes your individual rights are more important that the rights of your neighbors or other members of your community. We are all inconvenienced and unhappy, but what makes you, or me for that matter, more important that someone else. If we all just did what we wanted govt be damned, it would be a lawless mess out there. I get the individual rights and states rights history of our country, but we only yell when it is our rights that get trampled...the heck if someone else rights get trampled. It is the same issue with arguments for or against abortion or the gun rights argument. Don't take my gun, but if you want to outlaw abortion, that's ok. Or the other way around don't take my abortion right, but I will take your gun. Who's rights are more important? By the way, I remain neutral on the abortion and gun rights debate I am not advocating either side or that one is more right than the other. Just that we need to see that our right are important, but so are the rights of those that we disagree with so we need to choose the path of greater good and greater care, in my opinion.
I would grant my neighbors and members of my community the same individual rights. Not sure I understand your logic. We all get to make choices.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk