psuhoffman

If that’s your justification why not advocate we freeze all debts/rents/utilities? That would accomplish the same thing without risking lives!

Maybe it will go smoothly but this assertion has huge holes. With everything shut down there is no pressure to go to work. Once things open many won’t have the ability to stay home if the boss says get back to work. And before you say “those people can’t afford to be home now, that’s only true because we chose not to freeze all debts, rents and utilities like some other nations did. Plus there would be no further assistance if things are declared “back to normal”. Finally if this does cause a flare up it increase the risk to the essential employees still working. Maybe it works but it’s not the “free choice” utopia you sell it as.

The weekly variance is very likely due to the decreased staffing to process information over the weekend. The “unprocessed” data over the weekend ends up dumped into the Monday/Tuesday reports. But it’s not as big a deal as “some” are proposing wrt reliability. Yes it skews single day data. But we (and no one of importance is anyways) shouldn’t be using any single day to draw meaningful conclusions. Since the phenomenon is logical and consistent every week the fluctuations do not impact the longer term weekly trends. The daily flux is predictable and can be factored into the analysis. I’m not saying this for your benefit, just pointing it out in general because I think the reliability of data is very important in this situation. Some numbers are not as applicable as others for various reasons, but some are wrt trends. But some have questioned the entire legitimacy of all data due to what is a very logical, common, and predictable weekly variation in processing.

No thanks I’m good

I can’t believe people are still arguing with him in the covid thread.

Naw, he is bitter though

Don’t question him he stayed at a holiday inn express last night. I stopped going down his rabbit holes days ago. It’s apparent he is trolling.

We aren’t finding out anything new. Was there any doubt a segment of our societies penchant for either “rugged individualism” or “selfishness” depending on who you are taking to, would be a huge problem in dealing with any problem that requires collective action and sacrifice? Isn’t this the main reason we haven’t been able to deal with any number of recent pressing issues? Healthcare? Gun violence? Education? Infrastructure? Poverty? We can’t solve lots of problems because there is a portion of our population that doesn’t want to sacrifice a darn thing for the good of anyone else and they even constructed a narrative that we are all better off that way! Great thread getting at exactly what I was saying wrt IDR the other day and how even if it’s lower the comps to influenza are invalid. Unfortunately all anyone on the “this is no big deal” side of the debate is going to get out of that is “fake news”. So accepting this narrative, you think letting what happened in NYC happen across the whole US in every urban area is acceptable? Don’t bother... It’s a rhetorical question in case you couldn’t tell! Yea except lashing out and emotional response is exactly what you want. You trigger people so you can accuse them of being triggered. It’s an intellectually dishonest endeavor. It’s also hypocritical because you get triggered quite easily. I’m out. See you all tomorrow

Don't waste your time

Something is slipping

Yea I tapped out of this mess last night. But good luck going down his rabbit holes. 1st Amendment dude...love it or leave it.

That’s 4chan tinfoil hat stuff. Sweden is a much less urban population. Sweden has far less international travel. Sweden did ask people to self quarantine and social distance voluntarily. But Sweden is still doing significantly worse than their Scandinavian neighbors, up to 15 times worse, which is a better comp. We didn’t implement social distancing in time. We waited about 2 weeks too long. It’s not as effective when you wait until after there is widespread community spread. Lastly the assertion that Sweden is on the steep downward curve is false. This doesn’t look like they have it under control to me.

Your “that’s just the way it is” justification wasn’t really logic based. Lots of things were “just that way” and then we decided there was a better way and policy changed. You’re also dismissing younger people with asthma, COPD, diabetes, heart disease, and chemo patients who are also seeing relatively high rates of severe infection. You are also dismissing the seriousness of this to people who survive. Many live but face long difficult recoveries and even permanent lung impairments. But you are entitled to that opinion. All that said my post wasn’t solely about you. This is starting to branch off on tangents everywhere on every side. Every point of view has been given ad nauseam at this point. No ones mind is being changed here and so the debate has become an unproductive exercise.

I stayed out if this for a long time. I decided to throw down for a bit. But I’m about ready to tap out again. Some of the arguments have veered off the path of intellectual integrity.

With no immunity letting this go would result in way more infections than a flu season. Even if the mortality was similar it would be an unacceptable result.

Lol if that was everyone’s attitude African Americans would still be property, women couldn’t vote, gays couldn’t marry, and 12 year olds would be working full time jobs not in school! Yep...that’s just the way it is...until people decide we can be better than that and then it isn’t You are probably just trolling now but that attitude is sad and has been used to justify a lot of bad policy over the years.

In my opinion our failure to do anything at all about something so horrific is embarrassing and yes my emotions play a part. I guess I have some empathy. What’s wrong with me! Everyone reacts on emotion. You may start with “logic” but that logic then elicits an emotional reaction. Unless you are a robit emotion factors in everything. My logic says random acts of mass violence are bad and worthy of at least some attempt to mitigate. Your calculus is different leading to a different emotional reaction but your attempt to dismiss a competing argument without doing the necessary refutation with cheap labeling is weak sauce. Wrt covid...are you lumping me in with others? I’ve not advocated using daily death rates to do anything. I’m not participating in a straw man argument.

Why do you keep referencing negatives about society to justify policy. Policy shouldn’t play to our weaknesses. It should be an attempt at the best possible outcome and to make things better. Not a white flag saying “that’s just how the cookie crumbles”.

You just referenced one of the most embarrassingly horrific things about our society in an attempt to justify a similar policy advocacy for something else! Couldn’t we at least try thoughts and prayers first? Next you’ll be saying stuff like “that’s just the way it is” or “shit happens”.

Yea well then we will end up in a bigger mess. The economy will suffer even worse if we have another spike. People might act all big and bad when that don’t see it and think it’s exagerated...the minute people around them get seriously ill and die they won’t be going out partying anymore. The economic result is the same only we lose more lives.

It can be. We exerted some emergency command controls during WW2 then ended them. Things can be implemented with a set expiration date. The 9/11 security measures have been debated and reauthorized multiple times. We could stop electing representatives who do that. We could exert enough pressure to stop them. But now we are veering way off topic. But you are basically advocating for a less effective policy because of your distrust of government. I’m not sacrificing people because of fear. I don’t live my life ruled by fear of the future. I’m not going to do something stupid today because someone else might do something stupid tomorrow. Deal with the problem in front of you in the most effective way possible. If or when government authoritarianism presents itself as a problem then we can deal with that.

One reason I favor a more universal policy with a temporary (and I mean temporary I am not attempting some socialist revolution) freeze and command controls of the economy, is if we try to run a market economy while one of the most significant sectors is shut down, we are going to exasperate what was already an unhealthy distribution of wealth and resources. The is no way to avoid the inequities this will produce. A freeze with temporary command controls then a reboot on the other side would be more equitable to everyone.

Likely the worst of both. Just enough do that to spread the virus but not enough to save the service industry economy.

Who is advocating for a complete lockdown for years? But the “opening” coming won’t be significantly different than now. Essential businesses are running and they used a liberal definition of essential. Most non essential businesses would struggle to survive in a social distancing construct. There would be less demand for their services anyways. There are some exceptions like golf courses where some intelligent policy changes could get them bank up and runninj. But that isn’t the majority. The effect of the loss of many service and recreation industry jobs is going to be a deep depression regardless of what we call the policy. So if you’re saying we should be planning some limited moves to get some sectors of the economy open that can do it in a way compatible with necessary social distancing policies I agree. But it’s not going to look substantially different than now to most people.