CSNbbs

(04-27-2020 09:36 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 09:30 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 09:25 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 09:15 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 08:57 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Any thoughts on the data scientists' report that Hampton Roads could start opening back up May 1?

That would mean our almighty Doctor-Governor would have to admit he was wrong. We've already seen him try to moonwalk himself away from ever doing that.

Why would he have to admit he was wrong?

Because the scientists say HR could open up 5/1. Shouldn't he listen to the scientists?

The blueprint they laid out for opening is completely data driven.

But the scientists?

Seriously though, the blueprint that has been laid out is purely political. It removes the responsibility for whatever shitshows ensue from the federal government.

Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

(04-27-2020 10:16 AM)smudge12 Wrote: [ -> ]Not saying that HR couldn't open by May 1 (or May 8), or that this data scientist is even wrong.

I simply think it'd be incredibly dumb for any Governor to take one model and base public policy on it, instead of gathering input from a bunch of different expertise. Fortunately, it seems like he's using a variety of opinions and research to formulate decisions.

It's not an enviable position for Northam; every decision will have its critics.

You are giving Gov. Northam the benefit of the doubt. It is your absolute right to do so.

I (a former Northam voter) disagree. My sense is that he is not "using a variety of opinions and research to formulate decisions." He instead, in my assessment, is exclusively focused on one and only one calculation - - what will garner him the most glowing write up from a narrative-driven press?

=> Ask yourself, did he use "using a variety of opinions" when he completely closed the state FOUR days in advance of a hurricane that didn't hit? Perhaps, but it strikes me that the only opinion that mattered to him at that time was the click-driven hysteria of a media that was begging for a catastrophic storm.

=> Did he use "a variety of opinions and research" when he made his controversial post-birth abortion comments? Or was he happily playing to a national media that wanted a hero on a topic that has become a political litmus test?

=> Was it "a variety of opinions" that caused him to initially confess to his long-ago blackface behavior, but then subsequently renege? Or was it a media calculation that allowed him to weather the initial storm and then permit the Democrat Party to avoid domino resignations resulting in the unthinkable appointment of a Republican speaker of the house as governor?

Politics is dirty. We all understand that. But this now involves an issue that goes beyond Herr Northam's tarnished reputation and political future. What he is doing is impacting dangerously upon the lives and future of many in the Commonwealth.

It would be nice, in this circumstance, if I thought the governor had some recognition of the fact that we are a free people, and should be treated with some deference on taking care of ourselves in crisis that was not of our making. I unfortunately do not.

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

I take it you are not really going out based on what you believe about the virus and lock downs, and that is totally cool. I would never tell anyone to put themselves in a situation that they are uncomfortable with, but you are missing what is ACTUALLY going on out in the world in HR. There isn't a ton of social distancing going on at this point, at least not the lock down portion. People are out everywhere where I live. The traffic in this area doesn't look much different than it did on a normal day. The reality is that we are just driving more people to Home Depot and Walmart, because nothing else is open. We are driving people to stores, because the parks and beaches aren't open. We also have tons of military people still going to work everyday. This lock down is not what you seem to imagine it is in our area, so to believe that there will be a massive outbreak if we open the beaches, parks, and more business just does not seem to compute with the reality of what is happening in the world around us.

EDIT:
To be clear. I totally support social distancing as we ease back toward normalcy. I believe when we open up we should all wear masks, sanitize our hands constantly, keep our distance the best we can, etc. I just don't believe the selective closing of businesses, parks, and beaches make sense at this point.

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

Driving is a privilege. Living freely is a right.

Are there considerations that may impact upon someone's right to live freely? Of course, when doing so threatens the lives and rights of others. But when the state goes about restricting someone's rights, it is supposed to do so in the most narrow manner possible.

Is that what is happening now in Virginia? Some may think so. I don't.

(04-27-2020 12:32 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

Driving is a privilege. Living freely is a right.

Are there considerations that may impact upon someone's right to live freely? Of course, when doing so threatens the lives and rights of others. But when the state goes about restricting someone's rights, it is supposed to do so in the most narrow manner possible.

Is that what is happening now in Virginia? Some may think so. I don't.

Living freely is and never has been a rite. We have always been governed by restrictive laws to ensure a reasonable level of community and society. That has always balanced the greater good against individual rites. You may feel your rites are infringed upon, but lets not pretend this is something new, it isn't. It is something we all have agreed to live with as part of a representative democratic government. As everyone tells me, if you don't like it, vote for the people who support the ideas and ideals that are important to you.

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

(04-27-2020 12:39 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:32 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

Driving is a privilege. Living freely is a right.

Are there considerations that may impact upon someone's right to live freely? Of course, when doing so threatens the lives and rights of others. But when the state goes about restricting someone's rights, it is supposed to do so in the most narrow manner possible.

Is that what is happening now in Virginia? Some may think so. I don't.

Living freely is and never has been a rite. We have always been governed by restrictive laws to ensure a reasonable level of community and society. That has always balanced the greater good against individual rites. You may feel your rites are infringed upon, but lets not pretend this is something new, it isn't. It is something we all have agreed to live with as part of a representative democratic government. As everyone tells me, if you don't like it, vote for the people who support the ideas and ideals that are important to you.

Laws are voted on by our representatives. They follow a process that requires our representatives to vote on our behalf to enact them. Each constituency has a voice in that process. This is not that. This is an authoritarian executive making edicts that strip me of my rights without me, through my representative, providing consent.

(04-27-2020 12:23 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

I take it you are not really going out based on what you believe about the virus and lock downs, and that is totally cool. I would never tell anyone to put themselves in a situation that they are uncomfortable with, but you are missing what is ACTUALLY going on out in the world in HR. There isn't a ton of social distancing going on at this point, at least not the lock down portion. People are out everywhere where I live. The traffic in this area doesn't look much different than it did on a normal day. The reality is that we are just driving more people to Home Depot and Walmart, because nothing else is open. We are driving people to stores, because the parks and beaches aren't open. We also have tons of military people still going to work everyday. This lock down is not what you seem to imagine it is in our area, so to believe that there will be a massive outbreak if we open the beaches, parks, and more business just does not seem to compute with the reality of what is happening in the world around us.

EDIT:
To be clear. I totally support social distancing as we ease back toward normalcy. I believe when we open up we should all wear masks, sanitize our hands constantly, keep our distance the best we can, etc. I just don't believe the selective closing of businesses, parks, and beaches make sense at this point.

Lets put it this way:

My kids are home (no school)

I left to get coffee from 17 hands- where patrons are not allowed inside and you pay at the door.

I have 2 meetings scheduled this week. One is at a bank where only one client is allowed in the bank at all times. I have to call in, make sure no one else is inside, and then be escorted in. My second meeting is at the courthouse where I have to be sworn in. For that one, each of our board members have to go in separately, wear a required mask, and swear in.

I have ordered food from multiple restaurants and they are only doing curbside pickup or no contact delivery.

I refuse to go to home depot or lowes but my understanding is people way in lines spread apart outside and they let a limited number of people in the store at one time.

How could we possibly claim this is business as usual?

(04-27-2020 12:44 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

I mean, no one really believed this was going to be a 2 week thing, right?

We have certainly flattened the curve. However, I still think we are in the high danger zone in terms of what would happen if restrictions were lifted. Do I think we could soon see some slow easing back in? Absolutely.

I view it differently than you. I look at see the all the measures we have taken and still have 55,000 deaths. Projected to be about 70,000 by August 1st. We cant stay closed forever, but I would rather err on the side of caution or the last 6 weeks will have been a complete waste. What happens if we open too soon and see a huge spike in cases (likely)? We start the clock over again or figure out if we have the capacity to deal with the cases?

(04-27-2020 12:51 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:23 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

I take it you are not really going out based on what you believe about the virus and lock downs, and that is totally cool. I would never tell anyone to put themselves in a situation that they are uncomfortable with, but you are missing what is ACTUALLY going on out in the world in HR. There isn't a ton of social distancing going on at this point, at least not the lock down portion. People are out everywhere where I live. The traffic in this area doesn't look much different than it did on a normal day. The reality is that we are just driving more people to Home Depot and Walmart, because nothing else is open. We are driving people to stores, because the parks and beaches aren't open. We also have tons of military people still going to work everyday. This lock down is not what you seem to imagine it is in our area, so to believe that there will be a massive outbreak if we open the beaches, parks, and more business just does not seem to compute with the reality of what is happening in the world around us.

EDIT:
To be clear. I totally support social distancing as we ease back toward normalcy. I believe when we open up we should all wear masks, sanitize our hands constantly, keep our distance the best we can, etc. I just don't believe the selective closing of businesses, parks, and beaches make sense at this point.

Lets put it this way:

My kids are home (no school)

I left to get coffee from 17 hands- where patrons are not allowed inside and you pay at the door.

I have 2 meetings scheduled this week. One is at a bank where only one client is allowed in the bank at all times. I have to call in, make sure no one else is inside, and then be escorted in. My second meeting is at the courthouse where I have to be sworn in. For that one, each of our board members have to go in separately, wear a required mask, and swear in.

I have ordered food from multiple restaurants and they are only doing curbside pickup or no contact delivery.

I refuse to go to home depot or lowes but my understanding is people way in lines spread apart outside and they let a limited number of people in the store at one time.

How could we possibly claim this is business as usual?

Yeah those lines at stores that you are talking about do not exist on weekends. At least not in my neighborhood. Home Depot and Walmart both had completely full parking lots and no line to get in. Seems HD is only enforcing on weekdays, and Walmart doesn't seem to be enforcing at all.

As for your bank at the city, we are talking about small numbers anyway compared to those big box stores.

Food, you may be doing it one way, but CFA has lines of 50+ cars at lunch and dinner everyday, and you interact with at least 3 employees, not to mention the 20 inside the restaurant handling food. Other fast food restaurants aren't as busy, but are still packed.

Then there are those quarter of a million military folks in HR that are still going to work everyday. Nobody ever reacts to that point when I make it, for some reason.

(04-27-2020 01:01 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:44 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

I mean, no one really believed this was going to be a 2 week thing, right?

We have certainly flattened the curve. However, I still think we are in the high danger zone in terms of what would happen if restrictions were lifted. Do I think we could soon see some slow easing back in? Absolutely.

I view it differently than you. I look at see the all the measures we have taken and still have 55,000 deaths. Projected to be about 70,000 by August 1st. We cant stay closed forever, but I would rather err on the side of caution or the last 6 weeks will have been a complete waste. What happens if we open too soon and see a huge spike in cases (likely)? We start the clock over again or figure out if we have the capacity to deal with the cases?

This is why we base openings on localities, and close back down based on localities. The fact that this thing is being managed on such a broad scale has absolutely not good reason. We have been at this for 6 weeks or so and VB has seen fewer than 400 cases and 10 deaths. Seems your concerns are a bit outsized for VB?

(04-27-2020 01:02 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:51 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:23 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 10:01 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]Based on the facts, his position seems far more likely to be accurate than our state gov't that said we may be in phase 1 for 2 years.

Some facts about Hampton Roads (population around 1.5 million):

Positive tests:1,703

Hospitalizations:359

Deaths: 56

2 YEARS?????

What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

I take it you are not really going out based on what you believe about the virus and lock downs, and that is totally cool. I would never tell anyone to put themselves in a situation that they are uncomfortable with, but you are missing what is ACTUALLY going on out in the world in HR. There isn't a ton of social distancing going on at this point, at least not the lock down portion. People are out everywhere where I live. The traffic in this area doesn't look much different than it did on a normal day. The reality is that we are just driving more people to Home Depot and Walmart, because nothing else is open. We are driving people to stores, because the parks and beaches aren't open. We also have tons of military people still going to work everyday. This lock down is not what you seem to imagine it is in our area, so to believe that there will be a massive outbreak if we open the beaches, parks, and more business just does not seem to compute with the reality of what is happening in the world around us.

EDIT:
To be clear. I totally support social distancing as we ease back toward normalcy. I believe when we open up we should all wear masks, sanitize our hands constantly, keep our distance the best we can, etc. I just don't believe the selective closing of businesses, parks, and beaches make sense at this point.

Lets put it this way:

My kids are home (no school)

I left to get coffee from 17 hands- where patrons are not allowed inside and you pay at the door.

I have 2 meetings scheduled this week. One is at a bank where only one client is allowed in the bank at all times. I have to call in, make sure no one else is inside, and then be escorted in. My second meeting is at the courthouse where I have to be sworn in. For that one, each of our board members have to go in separately, wear a required mask, and swear in.

I have ordered food from multiple restaurants and they are only doing curbside pickup or no contact delivery.

I refuse to go to home depot or lowes but my understanding is people way in lines spread apart outside and they let a limited number of people in the store at one time.

How could we possibly claim this is business as usual?

Yeah those lines at stores that you are talking about do not exist on weekends. At least not in my neighborhood. Home Depot and Walmart both had completely full parking lots and no line to get in. Seems HD is only enforcing on weekdays, and Walmart doesn't seem to be enforcing at all.

As for your bank at the city, we are talking about small numbers anyway compared to those big box stores.

Food, you may be doing it one way, but CFA has lines of 50+ cars at lunch and dinner everyday, and you interact with at least 3 employees, not to mention the 20 inside the restaurant handling food. Other fast food restaurants aren't as busy, but are still packed.

Then there are those quarter of a million military folks in HR that are still going to work everyday. Nobody ever reacts to that point when I make it, for some reason.

I have no idea how to comment on the military since I don't know what they are doing. They aren't reporting the number of cases they have or the number of deaths. They shut down that reporting (unless it's changed recently)

I have only dealt with subcontractors. They have split their ***** up to limit the number of people in buildings at one time. They also are required to wear masks and gloves.

(04-27-2020 01:07 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:01 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:44 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

I mean, no one really believed this was going to be a 2 week thing, right?

We have certainly flattened the curve. However, I still think we are in the high danger zone in terms of what would happen if restrictions were lifted. Do I think we could soon see some slow easing back in? Absolutely.

I view it differently than you. I look at see the all the measures we have taken and still have 55,000 deaths. Projected to be about 70,000 by August 1st. We cant stay closed forever, but I would rather err on the side of caution or the last 6 weeks will have been a complete waste. What happens if we open too soon and see a huge spike in cases (likely)? We start the clock over again or figure out if we have the capacity to deal with the cases?

This is why we base openings on localities, and close back down based on localities. The fact that this thing is being managed on such a broad scale has absolutely not good reason. We have been at this for 6 weeks or so and VB has seen fewer than 400 cases and 10 deaths. Seems your concerns are a bit outsized for VB?

Again, it's like talking to a wall. There is a reason there are few cases.

(04-27-2020 01:11 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:07 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:01 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:44 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 11:56 AM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]What they need to gauge is not how many cases there are when social distancing measures are in place....thats pointless for determining when social distancing measures should be open. What they need to gauge is how many cases (and hospitalizations/deaths) there would be if there were lesser-to-no social distancing measures.

To put in other terms; imagine no cars were allowed on the road (or very few). Someone came in and said, we shouldn't have a speed limit because look at how few accidents we've had! Does that make sense? Or would it make sense to say, how many accidents would we have if people were allowed to drive and there was no speed limit?

This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

I mean, no one really believed this was going to be a 2 week thing, right?

We have certainly flattened the curve. However, I still think we are in the high danger zone in terms of what would happen if restrictions were lifted. Do I think we could soon see some slow easing back in? Absolutely.

I view it differently than you. I look at see the all the measures we have taken and still have 55,000 deaths. Projected to be about 70,000 by August 1st. We cant stay closed forever, but I would rather err on the side of caution or the last 6 weeks will have been a complete waste. What happens if we open too soon and see a huge spike in cases (likely)? We start the clock over again or figure out if we have the capacity to deal with the cases?

This is why we base openings on localities, and close back down based on localities. The fact that this thing is being managed on such a broad scale has absolutely not good reason. We have been at this for 6 weeks or so and VB has seen fewer than 400 cases and 10 deaths. Seems your concerns are a bit outsized for VB?

Again, it's like talking to a wall. There is a reason there are few cases.

Can you show proof of that since you are so sure absolutely positive? What about the states that never locked down? There frankly is more data on my side of this argument. Your side has assumptions, models, opinions, and conjecture, but not one piece of evidence.

If we stay locked down forever, there will always be just a few cases. That makes sense. Are we seriously supposed to live in this current environment until we can guarantee we won't have any more than "just a few" cases?

Approximately, 50k deaths, more than a quarter of which are in one state. A significantly high percentage of deaths nationwide are in LTC facilities. No one here is suggesting we start letting people parade into the nursing homes.

I understand your point of view, I do. But, you are looking at this from a perspective of a one size, fits all approach. No one is arguing that it should be a free-for-all. But, for most of us, even if we get COVID, we'll be fine. What's wrong with an approach based on micro factors (location, health status, etc.)?

I have to admit, Giles, I think in this discussion, your point of view surprises me the most. For someone who is so driven to analyze basketball players by advanced statistics, it seems that your approach to this virus is emotional. I mean, i understand it, it just surprises me a bit.

(04-27-2020 12:27 AM)Sirloin Burger Wrote: [ -> ]lol,

It's actually worse...

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(04-27-2020 01:23 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:11 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:07 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 01:01 PM)Gilesfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-27-2020 12:44 PM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]This is a pretty good retort. However, the stay-at-home order was given, supposedly, for one reason: to flatten the curve and make sure the health care system is not overwhelmed. That was going to be a roughly two-week thing. Now, 5 or 6 weeks into this (I, honestly, have lost track), we have data to show that with the exception of high-risk populations, the death rate and hospitalization rate of this virus is far less than it was when we put these measures into place. Show me a data set that indicates loosening some of the restrictions, slowly, would overwhelm the hospitals, and I might start having trust in our almighty governor. Until then, I will continue to have absolutely no faith in his ability to do his job.

I mean, no one really believed this was going to be a 2 week thing, right?

We have certainly flattened the curve. However, I still think we are in the high danger zone in terms of what would happen if restrictions were lifted. Do I think we could soon see some slow easing back in? Absolutely.

I view it differently than you. I look at see the all the measures we have taken and still have 55,000 deaths. Projected to be about 70,000 by August 1st. We cant stay closed forever, but I would rather err on the side of caution or the last 6 weeks will have been a complete waste. What happens if we open too soon and see a huge spike in cases (likely)? We start the clock over again or figure out if we have the capacity to deal with the cases?

This is why we base openings on localities, and close back down based on localities. The fact that this thing is being managed on such a broad scale has absolutely not good reason. We have been at this for 6 weeks or so and VB has seen fewer than 400 cases and 10 deaths. Seems your concerns are a bit outsized for VB?

Again, it's like talking to a wall. There is a reason there are few cases.

Can you show proof of that since you are so sure absolutely positive? What about the states that never locked down? There frankly is more data on my side of this argument. Your side has assumptions, models, opinions, and conjecture, but not one piece of evidence.

You can take a look at the Scandinavian countries and their approaches. Clearly social distancing will have an effect on the spread of a virus. I don't see how that's debatable.