(05-29-2020 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 03:36 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted.

And funny, you are seemingly in a conversation with someone with those exact same qualities. In which you seem amazingly eager to find some (or any ) rationale to blow their opinion off, and communicate that unwillingness to consider to the rest of us hear.

Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

I was, and still am, legitimately interested in understanding why RU felt that way, even more so since there are a lot of experts who don’t appear to be strongly on one side of the issue or the other, or strongly on the other. Basically, there isn’t a consensus, so I was wondering what was making RU feel so strongly.

Hmmm.....

Quote:Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

Please note *precisely* where in your comment of "Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted." there is *any* question, let alone any comment directed to RU or his background?

Funny, I dont seem to see that there.

So now I have to list someone’s credentials before I ask a question?

Here’s the first post - let me know what I needed to say differently to make you happy:

“ I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?”

(05-29-2020 05:12 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:08 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  When they post on here, we can have that discussion.

Oh man... I can't wait for the right wing faction here to collectively lose their s*** over the condescending nature of your post. Those guys HATE condescension.

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:08 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  When they post on here, we can have that discussion.

And until then, don’t even ask a question. Got it!

(05-29-2020 05:25 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Because apparently I can’t ask a question of another poster. And apparently can’t even have a ******* conversation if I’m not a Parliament anointed expert.

I mean, what sort of boot licking do y’all want? I literally tried to ask a question to gain more insight into someone’s opinion because they do have on the ground insight and Ham has a ******* cow.

(05-29-2020 05:35 PM)ruowls Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 12:52 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?

What makes you feel you know what proper precautions and associated risk really are?

(05-29-2020 06:06 PM)ruowls Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And funny, you are seemingly in a conversation with someone with those exact same qualities. In which you seem amazingly eager to find some (or any ) rationale to blow their opinion off, and communicate that unwillingness to consider to the rest of us hear.

Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

I was, and still am, legitimately interested in understanding why RU felt that way, even more so since there are a lot of experts who don’t appear to be strongly on one side of the issue or the other, or strongly on the other. Basically, there isn’t a consensus, so I was wondering what was making RU feel so strongly.

Hmmm.....

Quote:Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

Please note *precisely* where in your comment of "Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted." there is *any* question, let alone any comment directed to RU or his background?

Funny, I dont seem to see that there.

So now I have to list someone’s credentials before I ask a question?

Here’s the first post - let me know what I needed to say differently to make you happy:

“ I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?”

The problem is that COVID isn't in a vacuum unto itself. The "too much unknown" refers to both the course of the infection and actions trying to combat the infection. And because of these unkowns, there isn't really any known relative risk to judge the effects of a course of action.
There have been competing studies and opinions that have come out. Some with polar opposite conclusions and recommendations. For example, some studies show that the viral load and shedding in kids is significantly less than that of adults. They will have a much lower risk to infect others. Yet, schools are shut down and there are discussions to continue school closures into the next school year. Why? I would say this is an over-reaction. The article itself calls it ironic that health facilities and supply of providers may be jeopardized in the future because they gutted these capacities. I think I posted on here way back that the ventilator scare was a means for hospitals to bolster their equipment supplies on the cheap. I also posted that the delay in care for "non-essential" procedures led to problems treating other illnesses. Hospitals have received additional funding to offset the lost revenue. They also are in a competitive advantage by receiving these funds versus competition in their market. In other words, an urgent care center owned by a hospital can remain open and provide extended hours by subsidizing this business line by drawing from the money they received while free standing urgent cares have to cut staffing and hours and lose market share to the subsidized hospital urgent care. This crisis and decisions made gutted the healthcare delivery system while providing unfair economic opportunities for hospitals to exploit and increase their market share going forward. And this is going on during a scare of the system being overrun. And now they will continue this by saying that hospitals need to bolster their ability to absorb the "next" wave.
There are so many games that are going on that have nothing to do with actually dealing with COVID.

(05-29-2020 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 03:36 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted.

And funny, you are seemingly in a conversation with someone with those exact same qualities. In which you seem amazingly eager to find some (or any ) rationale to blow their opinion off, and communicate that unwillingness to consider to the rest of us hear.

Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

I was, and still am, legitimately interested in understanding why RU felt that way, even more so since there are a lot of experts who don’t appear to be strongly on one side of the issue or the other, or strongly on the other. Basically, there isn’t a consensus, so I was wondering what was making RU feel so strongly.

Hmmm.....

Quote:Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

Please note *precisely* where in your comment of "Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted." there is *any* question, let alone any comment directed to RU or his background?

Funny, I dont seem to see that there.

So now I have to list someone’s credentials before I ask a question?

Here’s the first post - let me know what I needed to say differently to make you happy:

“ I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?”

(05-29-2020 06:11 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The officer involved has been arrested and charged with third degree murder/manslaughter. The family has protested that they wanted first degree murder.

I guess the left has not learned the lesson of overcharging that was presented in the Trayvon martin case.

The blood lust displayed makes Custer's Last Stand feud look like a Sunday dinner.

(05-29-2020 07:03 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 06:06 PM)ruowls Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

I was, and still am, legitimately interested in understanding why RU felt that way, even more so since there are a lot of experts who don’t appear to be strongly on one side of the issue or the other, or strongly on the other. Basically, there isn’t a consensus, so I was wondering what was making RU feel so strongly.

Hmmm.....

Quote:Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

Please note *precisely* where in your comment of "Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted." there is *any* question, let alone any comment directed to RU or his background?

Funny, I dont seem to see that there.

So now I have to list someone’s credentials before I ask a question?

Here’s the first post - let me know what I needed to say differently to make you happy:

“ I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?”

The problem is that COVID isn't in a vacuum unto itself. The "too much unknown" refers to both the course of the infection and actions trying to combat the infection. And because of these unkowns, there isn't really any known relative risk to judge the effects of a course of action.
There have been competing studies and opinions that have come out. Some with polar opposite conclusions and recommendations. For example, some studies show that the viral load and shedding in kids is significantly less than that of adults. They will have a much lower risk to infect others. Yet, schools are shut down and there are discussions to continue school closures into the next school year. Why? I would say this is an over-reaction. The article itself calls it ironic that health facilities and supply of providers may be jeopardized in the future because they gutted these capacities. I think I posted on here way back that the ventilator scare was a means for hospitals to bolster their equipment supplies on the cheap. I also posted that the delay in care for "non-essential" procedures led to problems treating other illnesses. Hospitals have received additional funding to offset the lost revenue. They also are in a competitive advantage by receiving these funds versus competition in their market. In other words, an urgent care center owned by a hospital can remain open and provide extended hours by subsidizing this business line by drawing from the money they received while free standing urgent cares have to cut staffing and hours and lose market share to the subsidized hospital urgent care. This crisis and decisions made gutted the healthcare delivery system while providing unfair economic opportunities for hospitals to exploit and increase their market share going forward. And this is going on during a scare of the system being overrun. And now they will continue this by saying that hospitals need to bolster their ability to absorb the "next" wave.
There are so many games that are going on that have nothing to do with actually dealing with COVID.

Thanks, I appreciate the response.

I 100% agree with your statements about the unknowns, but that’s precisely why I don’t think it’s clear cut that we overacted across the board. I think there’s no question we overreacted in some cases (and that may increase as we continue to learn more). But had, say, NYC not locked down, I feel fairly certain the cases and deaths would have been incredible.

But as we learn more, for less dense areas, a shifted focus could have been more appropriate.

I also completely agree with the comment about the games being played. I’d lump in the numerous grifters that have been able to parlay the swift economic (or even medical) response into a windfall that borders, or fully falls into, fraud.

With regard to your elective procedures, were the states deciding when hospitals could or couldn’t do them? Or was that a provider specific decision?

(05-29-2020 07:52 PM)ruowls Wrote:  I saw a number that the median age of COVID deaths in CA was 83. Instituting severe measures to save them would seem prudent but to do so across the board seems exactly like an over-reaction that caused more harm and more death than it prevented.

(05-29-2020 07:52 PM)ruowls Wrote:  I saw a number that the median age of COVID deaths in CA was 83. Instituting severe measures to save them would seem prudent but to do so across the board seems exactly like an over-reaction that caused more harm and more death than it prevented.

(05-29-2020 07:03 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:22 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 05:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-29-2020 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And funny, you are seemingly in a conversation with someone with those exact same qualities. In which you seem amazingly eager to find some (or any ) rationale to blow their opinion off, and communicate that unwillingness to consider to the rest of us hear.

Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

I was, and still am, legitimately interested in understanding why RU felt that way, even more so since there are a lot of experts who don’t appear to be strongly on one side of the issue or the other, or strongly on the other. Basically, there isn’t a consensus, so I was wondering what was making RU feel so strongly.

Hmmm.....

Quote:Yes, asking someone why they feel so strongly is blowing them off...

Please note *precisely* where in your comment of "Im pretty sure there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum with those exact same qualities. I’d also like to know why they think we definitely under-reacted." there is *any* question, let alone any comment directed to RU or his background?

Funny, I dont seem to see that there.

So now I have to list someone’s credentials before I ask a question?

Here’s the first post - let me know what I needed to say differently to make you happy:

“ I’ve got a hard time believing we 100% over reacted or 100% under reacted. Just too much unknown and risk associated with not taking proper precautions.

What makes you feel so strongly that we over reacted?”

It is fine to ask that question. Perhaps you are clueless that the comments I am making light of are the ones that I have responded to. Typically they are the last ones in the chain. Funny how that happens.

SO, yes, you did ask a question. And got an answer.

Then you made a douchy comment since you didnt like that answer that 'well maybe I would like to see the answer of someone with those traits who dont think like you .' *That* garnered my first comment to you.

Then you cry out 'well I am *only* asking a question'. No, you didnt *only* do that. That garnered my second comment to you that denoted where in your douchy aside there was a question of any sort.

Now you feel the urge to simply 'forget' and ignore anything and everything that you posted *aside* from your first question. Quite the roll you are on here.

(05-31-2020 05:10 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I thought Texas' Covid 19's new case numbers seemed a bit high today for a Sunday (like 1200-plus as of 5 pm - it will go higher as more counties report in). So I looked up the numbers a bit. Walker County (Huntsville) has more than 500 new cases today! That's a county of maybe 73,000 so that's an incredibly high number of new cases for a county that sized.

Obviously it has to be the prisons releasing some new updates. But Huntsville can't be happy with that update.

(05-31-2020 05:10 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I thought Texas' Covid 19's new case numbers seemed a bit high today for a Sunday (like 1200-plus as of 5 pm - it will go higher as more counties report in). So I looked up the numbers a bit. Walker County (Huntsville) has more than 500 new cases today! That's a county of maybe 73,000 so that's an incredibly high number of new cases for a county that sized.

Obviously it has to be the prisons releasing some new updates. But Huntsville can't be happy with that update.

(05-31-2020 07:27 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 05:10 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I thought Texas' Covid 19's new case numbers seemed a bit high today for a Sunday (like 1200-plus as of 5 pm - it will go higher as more counties report in). So I looked up the numbers a bit. Walker County (Huntsville) has more than 500 new cases today! That's a county of maybe 73,000 so that's an incredibly high number of new cases for a county that sized.

Obviously it has to be the prisons releasing some new updates. But Huntsville can't be happy with that update.

I'm not so sure that case numbers really matter to the degree being pushed by the media, FBO. It seems reasonable to expect that as we go forward, now that we have the equipment and readiness and also several treatments as well as several developing vaccines, that many or even most people will eventually be exposed to this particular virus. Deaths have been going down since their peak levels, even in the states that have opened up earlier and more fully than others. It seems the riots the last several days have shown that many people, even those in the allegedly more vulnerable populations care less and less about the social distancing and are willing to engage in activities at close range or even shoulder to shoulder. Many without facemasks.

Too, no one shut their entire economies down for AIDS/HIV, which was pretty darn deadly back during its initial outbreak years and still is. There is still no vaccine for that, many people contracted it, many died, and that disease was and remains almost 100% preventable, yet no one really changed the behaviors that directly lead to infection, many people still contract it unnecessarily every year, and drug companies and vulnerable communities alike seem pretty comfortable with living with and managing that disease without social distancing that would basically end it, and spending lots of money to do so.

The sooner all states fully reopen, all sports get back on fields and all folks get back to normal the better things will be and this will be more or less over, with the exception of a small very vulnerable population, same as AIDS/HIV.

(06-01-2020 07:24 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 07:27 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(05-31-2020 05:10 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I thought Texas' Covid 19's new case numbers seemed a bit high today for a Sunday (like 1200-plus as of 5 pm - it will go higher as more counties report in). So I looked up the numbers a bit. Walker County (Huntsville) has more than 500 new cases today! That's a county of maybe 73,000 so that's an incredibly high number of new cases for a county that sized.

Obviously it has to be the prisons releasing some new updates. But Huntsville can't be happy with that update.

I'm not so sure that case numbers really matter to the degree being pushed by the media, FBO. It seems reasonable to expect that as we go forward, now that we have the equipment and readiness and also several treatments as well as several developing vaccines, that many or even most people will eventually be exposed to this particular virus. Deaths have been going down since their peak levels, even in the states that have opened up earlier and more fully than others. It seems the riots the last several days have shown that many people, even those in the allegedly more vulnerable populations care less and less about the social distancing and are willing to engage in activities at close range or even shoulder to shoulder. Many without facemasks.

Too, no one shut their entire economies down for AIDS/HIV, which was pretty darn deadly back during its initial outbreak years and still is. There is still no vaccine for that, many people contracted it, many died, and that disease was and remains almost 100% preventable, yet no one really changed the behaviors that directly lead to infection, many people still contract it unnecessarily every year, and drug companies and vulnerable communities alike seem pretty comfortable with living with and managing that disease without social distancing that would basically end it, and spending lots of money to do so.

The sooner all states fully reopen, all sports get back on fields and all folks get back to normal the better things will be and this will be more or less over, with the exception of a small very vulnerable population, same as AIDS/HIV.

Transmission for AIDS/HIV was a bit different than the coronavirus....

(06-01-2020 08:15 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm convinced that a lot of the shutdowns were going to happen -- virus or no virus. I had been saying for awhile that the economy wasn't as strong as some groups were claiming. As a country, we were sort of like Enron - the books looked good but if you peered deep into them, you would have seen that a lot of the numbers had no substance behind them.

(06-01-2020 08:15 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm convinced that a lot of the shutdowns were going to happen -- virus or no virus.