psuhoffman

@wxtrix poverty and crime are correlated at a statistically significant level. However there are multiple other factors so it’s not 1:1. There can be some poor areas that do better and some wealthy that do worse. And predominantly white regions with high povert have the same correlation so bringing race into this was unwarranted.

There are lots of things you could advocate for to help small businesses other than simply open up. Again you paint everything into a binary choice. You even go out of your way to avoid middle ground measures. See above I could give you a suggestion where you should go! Why you getting all emotional???

I said about 50 pages ago that this whole argument is kinda moot and semantics because the “opening” wasn’t going to radically different from what we have now due to a combo of lax regulations, non compliance, and an opening that still is likely to include some social distancing measures. But you probably didn’t notice because you were busy typing your next post trying to get everyone else to live in constant fear of the government like you.

Oh the point your making hadn’t been lost on me. I’ve taken note of the people who were vehemently on the side of law enforcement and “respect authority” when there were altercations between police and POC but who are carrying on like a 4 year old throwing a tantrum now that authority is infringing on their liberty a little bit!

Are the professors all under 20? Will the students only come in contact with other young people? Or do you not understand how transmission of communicable disease works?

Another overtly political post with absolutely no substantive content. And I don’t expect much change in numbers. Right now, in many places, people aren’t really acting like it’s a lockdown already. I have my doubts that a critical mass of the population isn’t already behaving in a way that neutralizes or at least muted the effectiveness of the current policies. Imo we have already seen the impact of that with the flattening but very slow decline or in some places even a continued slow increase. If we went back to completely open with no altered behaviors at all we probably would see a sudden spike. But if the “opening” happening looks not that substantialy different from what was actually happening the last 1-2 weeks why would the numbers change? The virus doesn’t care what we call the policy. The ground truth isn’t actually changing much.

Did you consult the CFS on that?

There is a HUGE range between total eradication and treat it like the flu...which basically means virtually no mitigation measures. You continue to try to force a false binary choice of extreme policy positions. I reject that narrative. And with that I’m out for today. Maybe I’ll engage more tomorrow but your advocacy today was pretty lame and I’m bored with it. Maybe tomorrow you will bring your A game.

Where do you live again? If you know...

And there is the “this is just like the flu” argument again.

We can’t strike. It’s illegal in Maryland. We would face severe retaliatory measures and our union would lose certification. The most we can do is threaten to “work to contract” which is some pressure since the district relies on many of us doing things above and beyond our actual required duties to function. But it’s far less power than you think we have. Parent advocacy is by far the leading pressure and influence on policy in MD. I don’t fault you for not knowing the intricacies of MD educational collective bargaining procedures. I don’t know squat about labor policies in many other fields. But you shouldn’t just assume and spread a narrative without that knowledge.

Except those recommendations were all made by MSDE at the state level without any input or pressure from us. We are collaborating with our local district in how to meet those standsrds building to building but you give us way too much power in this equation.

You’ve made this type of comment a few times and you’re either just trying to antagonize because you know there are several educators here or you’re misinformed. I was my building rep for 2 years and a union chapter committee chair for 3. And yes during that time I came across people trying to abuse the system to their personal advantage. One person even pressured me to file a grievance because an admin wrote him an email that supposedly made him wag his finger at the screen and caused an injury in his hand and he wanted compensation. Yea that was ridiculous. But that kind of crap was and still is the minority. But because the union has to file every complain (even though the crazy ones almost always get denied) it doesn’t stop the bad publicity from the minority of lazy or “persecution complex” paranoid loonies from making us all look bad. What I spend most of my efforts on were trying to lobby for ways to make our pensions and benefits system more solvent and increasing teachers time in the classroom and on actual teaching vs the numerous tasks being increasingly delegated to teachers as budget cuts cost auxiliary positions in special ed, social services, guidance, and attendance monitoring. Right now the MAJORITY of teachers commenting and comments from the union are supportive of opening as soon as safely possible. But there are some legitimate concerns wrt specific issues that need to be resolved. The initial guidance document I’ve seen from MSDE regarding plans for a possible fall opening says desks must be 6 feet apart. At my school class sizes are typically 30-40 but most classrooms can only hold about 15 desks with that spacing. So that does need to be resolved somehow. Shifts are an option. But then how do you staff both shifts? Another issue currently under consideration is how to monitor student health and what precautions to protect vulnerable students and teachers. Unfortunately because some patents don’t have a viable option of what to do with their children on short notice many students come to school in bad health under normal situations. If that happens with covid they would place the several students and teachers in the building that have serious health conditions at risk. And I know this won’t agree with your ideology, and you are totally entitled to your views on this, but the education system typically views each individual life (regardless of medical condition or age) as valuable, precious, and worth taking into consideration wrt policy decisions. So are teachers trying to prevent schools from opening, NO. Is there a very reasonable and responsible discussion ongoing about how to open in a way that protects every child and adult in the buildings as much as possible...yes.

@PhineasC let’s focus on one specific thing. What do you think the policy should be for high risk populations with medical conditions when we reopen?

I do think there is some evidence that this could possibly be handled in a less restrictive way. Some version of common sense social distancing and a plan to accommodate the high risk populations combined with testing/tracing and a plan to quickly mitigate hot spots that flare up. However...that isn’t the conversation happening here or what the people showing up at state houses with guns are advocating for. In some cases they are going out of their way to say no to some reasonable less restrictive measures for no logical reason. They are a combination of “you can’t tell me what to do” libertarians and “this is a hoax” conspiracy nuts. There are rational moderates on both sides that should be having a legit discussion about adapting our strategy as evidence comes in and adjusting over time. We probably can create an effective least restrictive policy if our government wasn’t the mess that it is right now. But I think most of those people have checked out of these debates frustrated by the way the two extreme polar opposites are dominating the narrative.

Expert consensus isn’t always perfect but it’s got a much higher success rate than going with “some random contrarian said what I want to hear”. The effects of social distancing on viral spread has been documented for hundreds of years. This isn’t new. How effective depends on various factors and is a valid discussion. Acting like “it just doesn’t work” is nonsense. Some variables in effect here... 1. We never really truly locked down. There were so many exceptions that allowed many people to still go to work and activities and other people took advantage of those exceptions to be doing things they technically shouldn’t have been in a “lockdown”. 2. GPS data shows people are relaxing their guard and traveling around more the last couple weeks. We see the evidence of that anecdotally as well with rises in traffic and crowds at places. I had to pick up some prescriptions from CVS the other day and there was a line of cars to get through the light in town as if it was almost a normal morning rush hour! My neighbor had a birthday party yesterday complete with a blow up bounce house and about 12 cars in their driveway. There was a town in OK that had to rescind their order to wear masks because some businesses were getting threats of violence when they attended to enforce it. (Btw I can’t believe they buckled to that kind of intimidation. The last thing you should do is reward bad behavior. That’s behavior modification 101! Every parent knows that. It only encourages it. If they had thrown a few of those assclowns in jail I’m pretty sure it would have stopped). Last time I went to the grocery store I waited in line to get in and the person in front of me had a mask on. Then after we got in I watched him take it off! Yes I know that’s all anecdotal but gps tracking data supports what we are seeing. Too many people are not taking the measures seriously! 3. There was some evidence covid can transmit airborn up to 10 feet but when that study came out we never adapted the guidelines. One reason was it’s just not practical unless you really go on true lockdown. Take the local Walmart here. They are only allowing 200 in at a time. The other day when I went to CVS the line to get in was ~150 yards through the parking lot. What would it look like if the standard was 10 feet and they could only let 120 in at a time? How would that work in the store? Checkout lines would be unmanageable. Lines to get into an aisle would be impossible to manage. I get all that. But if we choose to implement a less effective policy because the more effective one is inconvenient then we will get a less effective result. So discussions about these factors and the practicality of implementing effective measures is a legit discussion to have. And if the majority of people agree the measures needed to prevent transmission just aren’t worth it that’s acceptable so long as that decision is based on the facts. What’s not acceptable is trying to achieve a policy goal by telling people that “we can’t stop this no matter what we do so just let nature take its course”. That’s BS. It’s dishonest. And the decision shouldn’t be influenced by the handful of tin foil hat lunatics whose logic and reality are so warped they thing this is all part of some global deep state conspiracy to subjugate the world. And if the majority of society does decide we want to take serious mitigation measures than there should be some enforcement when the 30% of contrarians and libertarians who don’t like to let anyone tell them what to do threaten to render those efforts ineffective by their refusal to follow the law. If people want to examine all the facts and decide they don’t want to mitigate this I can accept that. And the facts might suggest there are ways to effectively fight this without a full lockdown. But there are too many people trying to trick people into that determination with nonsense.

You’ve now made numerous posts about being moderated which should be moderated because it’s cluttering up the thread. You obviously want to be moderated. You keep this up and sooner or later they will and then you will say see told ya so.

yea you made this boring argument last night...and you are still here making your case so...

I do think there is some evidence worth examining that suggests the risk of this virus to some populations is relatively low. If that turns out to be true I do think we can use that along with other things we learn as we go along to tailor an effective and less extreme mitigation policy. I am not advocating for a stay in lockdown for as long as it takes no matter what policy. I think there should be a discussion as we learn more and more about exactly what the most effective policy should be and if we can adapt and design less restrictive but still effective strategies to protect vulnerable populations. HOWEVER...that is not the conversation that is happening in here. And worse...it is not the reality that is happening in some places. Places that are opening aren't taking measures to protect vulnerable populations. They are simply opening up. There are a few people who are even going out of their way to discount taking certain common sense measures. I've seen "we obviously aren't going to do contact tracing" posted several times. Oh really...why is that? We have plenty of available labor who could quickly be hired and trained to do this. Why are some totally discounting what would be a proven method to mitigate the spread without more restrictive measures? They seem more intent on using this situation to validate their "give me liberty or give me death" ideology than formulating an effective pandemic response policy. I am totally willing to discuss ways (based on a scientific methodology and evidence) to formulate a less restrictive pandemic policy. I actually think that is where we need to take this in the coming weeks and months. But that discussion and policy should be driven by using evidence to develop methods to protect vulnerable people and to quickly respond and stop localized hotspots before they spread. The discussion shouldn't be driven by attempts to prove America values liberty over life.

His arguments have been consistent but his justifications for them jump all over the place.

@PhineasC I’m not going too deep down this hole because it’s way way way over the politics line...but populism is a way bigger threat to democracy and freedom than temporary emergency measures during a pandemic. Government had taken measures normally not accepted in emergencies when collective action is necessary plenty of times before. The only way these measure become permanent threats is if society allows it. And that attitude or lack of awareness would be the real threat not the virus mitigation policy. If we have become that complacent that we would allow the government to go full empire on us that result is inevitable and blaming a temporary pandemic policy for that is nearsighted.

Tell me again about being political...

I thought you were accusing others of being political. You jump around to various points but this one here doesn’t get more political.

But again I’m not claiming trips to the grocery store don’t add risk. They do. That’s why some people are trying to avoid that too. But people need food. You’re using a false equivalence here.

You keep selling it’s all or nothing. There is a HUGE policy space in between “open up and some people are gonna die” and “stay in hard core lockdown for years”. You are presenting a binary choice when the truth is a nuanced range of options.