(06-27-2020 06:35 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: (06-27-2020 05:48 PM)chiefsfan Wrote: (06-27-2020 12:50 PM)Saint3333 Wrote: The jury is out is mass gatherings contributing to the spread of the virus?
Nah, it’s called science and some seem to only apply it when they choose.
Its part of a quandry that this pandemic is putting many members of government in. We're a nation of freedoms. We pride ourselves in our ability to have the freedom to say what we want, and express ourselves how we want without facing reprisal.
There's a virus going around. While medical research is improving on it, the only sure way proven from other countries to stop/slow the spread of the virus is by imposing severe restrictions on residents. Most European countries required written permission for a person to leave their home to go to the Grocery Store or Pharmacy during this. China used forced lockdowns, and even went as far as forced separation of families to prevent Covid from spreading within households.
Any of those measures in the US would require extremely limiting anothers rights and freedoms for a short period of time to maintain the greater good. That requires an insane amount of trust between the citizens and their leadership.
If you tell a group of George Floyd protesters that they are well within their rights to gather by the thousands to protest the deep seeded racism that has existed in the US for years, how can you then turn around and tell the Republican Party they can't hold an in person convention? There's no great answer to it, and when you get even farther into forced quarantines, and business closures, you enter into even more murky territory that simply put this country has never had to do.
Also, this is a great post. I think chiefsfan and I are closer in our leanings on this than most would assume based upon the "sides" we've fallen into.
I'm very much in the middle. I'm convinced that while extreme social distancing works, I am not convinced it works in the US. It requires asking someone who is healthy to accept severe restrictions on not only their life, but their ability to earn a living wage. We're in a country where neither side trusts the government as far as they can throw them.
If there was a way to ensure every American was compensated with their regular monthly wages, than I would probably advocate more strict lockdowns. However unemployment, especially in many Southern State has been an unmitigated disaster. Stay at home orders have been different from state to state, and with the large number of people who work in a different state than they live, many of those are just stuck in a lurch
I work in Memphis, I live in Arkansas. When Memphis shut down to this for the first time in March, 40 percent of my income went flying out the door. Yet, Arkansas never shut down, so if I had simply worked within the state, I likely face a much smaller income loss.
I'm bound by health regulations in Memphis, which make running my business darn near impossible, yet accepting unemployment in Arkansas is not really an option because for the first 3 months of this, the state was 5 weeks behind on paying claims, and now they've removed most of the Covid protections forcing people on unemployment to regularly apply for jobs.
I'm left with a choice of either shutting things down, and taking Arkansas limited unemployment and hoping I can restart without restrictions before the benefits expire in 12 weeks, continuing to operate with restrictions, and accept a 2nd job in Arkansas on weekends, leaving me working 50 hours plus a week, or continuing to operate, and hoping to quietly ignore some of the tighter restrictions placed on us by the county and hoping we don't get caught.
None of those solutions are enviable. They are not the same choices as someone in my position in another state might face because that state has stronger worker protection.