I dont think I can agree that anything is a no-brainer if there isnt sufficient consensus on the topic. In this case, I actually think you two are arguing mostly over two different things - which complicates the matter further (and then, sometimes speaking in absolute terms that generally cannot be defended).
Guidance has flipped from what was originally said which was telling people to not use masks. Now they're saying use them. Don't you agree? If you don't agree, then maybe the early "don't wear masks" narrative is still poisoning your thoughts on the matter.
Again, asymptomatic carriers spread disease and we've known about this since the very early days of the pandemic. In fact, some of the first cases here in America were in Washington are were due to "community spread" with no foreign travel. People without symptoms or mild enough to be walking around have been transmitting the virus since the first known cases. And this has been known in China as well.
Of course you should wear masks and that's what scientific medical advisors advised in many other countries who have done a much better job than we have responding to the pandemic.
Correlation does not imply causation, true. We have had a terrible response and have over 25% of the deaths in the entire world. The United States population is equivalent to 4.25% of the total world population. Is this solely because of masks? That's not clear but it is a possible factor. Another factor could be our for-profit healthcare system sucks ass and our workers rights are terrible and a lot of people don't have sick days and even if they do they can't afford healthcare.
By the time the sun comes up tomorrow, we will be looking at the following facts: we will be #1 in the world in deaths from COVID-19. We will have half a million cases. A full 1/3rd of the case total for the entire world. A full 20% of the deaths. We have 4.5% of the world's population. There is no way to spin those numbers.
This is how easy Canada is making it. 48-hours from application to bank account. In light of that, has ANYONE seen their $1200.00 here yet??
No but I got my unemployment. One of the benefits of filing early I guess. Doesn't look like it's gonna end this month.
Scratch that, I got mine today. Girlfriend did too. Anyone else?
You got your stimulus package? I didn’t think the IRS had even started that yet. Trump has claimed we should start seeing them next week - maybe some are getting them early?
You are totally right. But there's a little huge problem there and it's why the advice should have been for everyone to wear masks this whole time. Wait for it.
If we could just be sure that the non-infected people don't wear masks that'd be great. But how do we know if a person is non-infected? We don't test enough people do we?
Here's a huge problem with your smug certainty:
The experts who have read the literature and do not advocate universal mask-wearing are obviously aware of this. So what do they know that you don't?
If the answer was so obvious that you could figure it out, there would be no debate to begin with. To hold otherwise is to claim that large numbers of health experts are stupid, lying or evil. The far more likely explanation is that it isn't that simple and just because you and Donald Trump have strong opinions on what "makes sense" does not mean you're actually right.
Yes, we got that already, professor - there's no need for potential non-symptomatic carriers to wear masks to reduce the spread to healthy populace. We got that.
Actually, what I've said is that there is no consensus on whether the benefits of universal mask-wearing outweigh the harms. I have no opinion on the matter, because the data isn't there yet. I reserve the right to change my mind when that situation changes.
It amazes me that people are so resistant to the idea that maybe, just maybe, their unprofessional opinions on questions of healthcare policy aren't worth as much as those who actually study the subject. But, again, whatever its source, this contempt for experts is the direct cause of thousands of deaths happening right now.
I don't know how the "we can't pay for it" argument can possibly survive after this, but it will. Not that blue dog Democrats won't help. I did see that Biden has incorporated moving Medicare eligibility to 60 instead of 65 into his platform. Since even the proposals of Warren and Sanders were phased in exactly like this, it strikes me as simply committing to the first step that will be way harder to argue against politically.
I think if you really believe the debate on what can or can't be afforded in the long term is going to be shifted substantively by massive spending in a dire emergency, you are doomed to be disappointed.
If anything, history suggests that as soon as the pandemic has substantively ended many people will be calling for massive austerity measures due to how much the government is spending now. And that this call will in fact have some traction because it intuitively makes sense to a lot of the public.
This is how easy Canada is making it. 48-hours from application to bank account. In light of that, has ANYONE seen their $1200.00 here yet??
No but I got my unemployment. One of the benefits of filing early I guess. Doesn't look like it's gonna end this month.
Scratch that, I got mine today. Girlfriend did too. Anyone else?
You got your stimulus package? I didn’t think the IRS had even started that yet. Trump has claimed we should start seeing them next week - maybe some are getting them early?
Yup. Sitting in my account right now. Actually not joking.
This is how easy Canada is making it. 48-hours from application to bank account. In light of that, has ANYONE seen their $1200.00 here yet??
No but I got my unemployment. One of the benefits of filing early I guess. Doesn't look like it's gonna end this month.
Scratch that, I got mine today. Girlfriend did too. Anyone else?
You got your stimulus package? I didn’t think the IRS had even started that yet. Trump has claimed we should start seeing them next week - maybe some are getting them early?
If Trump said people will see them before Easter, the media would have flipped when they couldn’t find a single person who had received it.
They (the federal government workers pushing out this stimulus package) have obviously been working hard to make sure people get their money as soon as possible.
I don't know how the "we can't pay for it" argument can possibly survive after this, but it will. Not that blue dog Democrats won't help. I did see that Biden has incorporated moving Medicare eligibility to 60 instead of 65 into his platform. Since even the proposals of Warren and Sanders were phased in exactly like this, it strikes me as simply committing to the first step that will be way harder to argue against politically.
I think if you really believe the debate on what can or can't be afforded in the long term is going to be shifted substantively by massive spending in a dire emergency, you are doomed to be disappointed.
If anything, history suggests that as soon as the pandemic has substantively ended many people will be calling for massive austerity measures due to how much the government is spending now. And that this call will in fact have some traction because it intuitively makes sense to a lot of the public.
I think what you describe is what WILL happen (I must have worded it badly). I just happen to think the argument is now utter horseshit. We are conjuring countless trillions of dollars out of thin air. One of my big takeaways from all of this is all the stuff we've told ourselves CAN'T be done was total crap. It doesn't just apply to government spending. We simply weren't doing it because certain people were making a shitload of money off not doing it.
It turned out alot of us COULD work from home. Easily. It turned out ATT doesn't really have to apply data caps to their wireless service. It turns out grocery store clerks actually DO deserve $15.00 an hour. What's pathetic is that it takes a once in a century pandemic to make people realize it. And your'e right, half of them will go right back to their previous thinking whenever this ends (which isn't anytime in the near or even distant future).
The experts who have read the literature and do not advocate universal mask-wearing are obviously aware of this. So what do they know that you don't?
If the answer was so obvious that you could figure it out, there would be no debate to begin with. To hold otherwise is to claim that large numbers of health experts are stupid, lying or evil. The far more likely explanation is that it isn't that simple and just because you and Donald Trump have strong opinions on what "makes sense" does not mean you're actually right.
Wow this is terrible argument lol. Lets take this a bit at a time, I'll keep it simple on the topic.
The experts who have read the literature and do not advocate universal mask-wearing are obviously aware of this. So what do they know that you don't?
The experts are saying to wear a mask now. In the beginning they said no mask. There has been a change, maybe you missed it? I've mentioned it several times now. Maybe that's why you aren't understanding where I'm coming from. And why are you still arguing for a debunked position? I'm suggesting that the new correct position - wear masks - was the correct position the whole time. You are arguing for the position that is not valid anymore - was never valid - and has proven so harmful and deadly.
I'm not going over this again but it deals with asymptomatic carriers being indistinguishable from non-infected people. You understand this concern right? The community spread and people walking around infecting others has been known since the beginning. Wearing a mask is a step that helps - to some degree - prevent spread.
I'd argue that this has always has been obvious. No mask, more spread. Everyone wearing masks? Less spread. I'm not a scientist though. Still.... It's not exactly rocket science.
If the answer was so obvious that you could figure it out, there would be no debate to begin with. To hold otherwise is to claim that large numbers of health experts are stupid, lying or evil.
You are trying to put words in my mouth. I never said "health experts are stupid, lying or evil". That's a conclusion you came to. I said they WERE wrong. They screwed up. You'll agree they've changed their position right (See above). They screwed up. You said they are "stupid lying or evil" not me. I don't agree with your theory there.
The far more likely explanation is that it isn't that simple and just because you and Donald Trump have strong opinions on what "makes sense" does not mean you're actually right.
I have an opinion and Donald Trump has an opinion, so everyone who has an opinion is Trump, huh?
That's a ridiculous opinion.
You and Donald Trump have strong opinions and that "does not mean you are actually right". But seriously, this line of logic doesn't hold up.
This "mask" tangent has been going on for multiple pages, and at this point, folks are just repeating old talking points over and over. This argument has been nothing but semantics for a long time now, and it has long since stopped contributing anything to the discussion.
The thread rules state that this thread is not here for people to win arguments with other forumites. This thread is here to share ideas and discuss politics. If you want to do the former, please do so in a PM thread, where it will not clog up the thread and crowd out other discussions.
I don't know how the "we can't pay for it" argument can possibly survive after this, but it will. Not that blue dog Democrats won't help. I did see that Biden has incorporated moving Medicare eligibility to 60 instead of 65 into his platform. Since even the proposals of Warren and Sanders were phased in exactly like this, it strikes me as simply committing to the first step that will be way harder to argue against politically.
I think if you really believe the debate on what can or can't be afforded in the long term is going to be shifted substantively by massive spending in a dire emergency, you are doomed to be disappointed.
If anything, history suggests that as soon as the pandemic has substantively ended many people will be calling for massive austerity measures due to how much the government is spending now. And that this call will in fact have some traction because it intuitively makes sense to a lot of the public.
I think what you describe is what WILL happen (I must have worded it badly). I just happen to think the argument is now utter horseshit. We are conjuring countless trillions of dollars out of thin air. One of my big takeaways from all of this is all the stuff we've told ourselves CAN'T be done was total crap. It doesn't just apply to government spending. We simply weren't doing it because certain people were making a shitload of money off not doing it.
It turned out alot of us COULD work from home. Easily. It turned out ATT doesn't really have to apply data caps to their wireless service. It turns out grocery store clerks actually DO deserve $15.00 an hour. What's pathetic is that it takes a once in a century pandemic to make people realize it. And your'e right, half of them will go right back to their previous thinking whenever this ends (which isn't anytime in the near or even distant future).
I wonder how this will affect peoples thinking long term. I can see merit in the idea that people would want a period of austerity, or that they will want a restructuring of society, or that things will just snap back to normal as if it never happened. My future predictions are more wrong than not so I'm making none.
By the time the sun comes up tomorrow, we will be looking at the following facts: we will be #1 in the world in deaths from COVID-19. We will have half a million cases. A full 1/3rd of the case total for the entire world. A full 20% of the deaths. We have 4.5% of the world's population. There is no way to spin those numbers.
Only 5 hours since you made this post, America has topped 500k cases. Probably be another day before it tops 20% of deaths (presently ~18.6k out of ~102k, going up roughly 2k/day).
New York City, alone, is over 94k cases. That puts it as sixth in the world, by itself, behind only the U.S. (regardless if you keep or subtract NY), Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.
Sure, easy way to spin the numbers. "China is lying." Cause a hubbub over whether or not China's numbers are lying, and to what extent. Basically, "Oh look over there while I run away."
By the time the sun comes up tomorrow, we will be looking at the following facts: we will be #1 in the world in deaths from COVID-19. We will have half a million cases. A full 1/3rd of the case total for the entire world. A full 20% of the deaths. We have 4.5% of the world's population. There is no way to spin those numbers.
Only 5 hours since you made this post, America has topped 500k cases. Probably be another day before it tops 20% of deaths (presently ~18.6k out of ~102k, going up roughly 2k/day).
New York City, alone, is over 94k cases. That puts it as sixth in the world, by itself, behind only the U.S. (regardless if you keep or subtract NY), Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.
Sure, easy way to spin the numbers. "China is lying." Cause a hubbub over whether or not China's numbers are lying, and to what extent. Basically, "Oh look over there while I run away."
As I've been saying, let's go WAY out on a limb and say China's number are......10x what they actually reported. We would still blow past them within two weeks from now. That's ignoring the obvious under-counting in our own numbers, and assuming the level of China's cooking the books is off the charts. If people are going to say China's numbers aren't real #1) our numbers aren't real either, they're just what we have and #2) they need to specify just HOW badly they think China is lying. Because I'm being incredibly generous with my hypothetical of how badly they are under-reporting.
There is no way to tell as a country we've hit a plateau because there are going to be multiple ones. It has probably been hit in NY because they have been under lockdown the longest after Washington and California (and we need to talk about California, because they are handling this better and earlier than anyone else given their population). People looked the numbers earlier in the week and thought we "hit" it. But now the decrease in net gains per days in New York is being filled in by other parts of the country, and it's going right back up again. Not at a 10-15% clip, but still at about 5%. Some of the hot spots other than New York aren't going to peak for another week or more.
A lot of people will defy social gathering bans and be in church Easter Sunday so expect deaths to spike in what about 5 days from then? To be honest I'm not sure how long it takes from when you get it to death. We can be certain that a lot of people will be getting it in mass gatherings like church. A lot of them will get infected and pass it on to others and kill them too.
By the time the sun comes up tomorrow, we will be looking at the following facts: we will be #1 in the world in deaths from COVID-19. We will have half a million cases. A full 1/3rd of the case total for the entire world. A full 20% of the deaths. We have 4.5% of the world's population. There is no way to spin those numbers.
Only 5 hours since you made this post, America has topped 500k cases. Probably be another day before it tops 20% of deaths (presently ~18.6k out of ~102k, going up roughly 2k/day).
New York City, alone, is over 94k cases. That puts it as sixth in the world, by itself, behind only the U.S. (regardless if you keep or subtract NY), Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.
Sure, easy way to spin the numbers. "China is lying." Cause a hubbub over whether or not China's numbers are lying, and to what extent. Basically, "Oh look over there while I run away."
As I've been saying, let's go WAY out on a limb and say China's number are......10x what they actually reported. We would still blow past them within two weeks from now. That's ignoring the obvious under-counting in our own numbers, and assuming the level of China's cooking the books is off the charts. If people are going to say China's numbers aren't real #1) our numbers aren't real either, they're just what we have and #2) they need to specify just HOW badly they think China is lying. Because I'm being incredibly generous with my hypothetical of how badly they are under-reporting.
There is no way to tell as a country we've hit a plateau because there are going to be multiple ones. It has probably been hit in NY because they have been under lockdown the longest after Washington and California (and we need to talk about California, because they are handling this better and earlier than anyone else given their population). People looked the numbers earlier in the week and thought we "hit" it. But now the decrease in net gains per days in New York is being filled in by other parts of the country, and it's going right back up again. Not at a 10-15% clip, but still at about 5%. Some of the hot spots other than New York aren't going to peak for another week or more.
Differences in definitions and the extent of testing make international comparisons of reported case numbers difficult. The number of deaths is a bit easier to compare I think. This graph shows progress over time from the 50th death reported by a number of countries.
France, Italy and the UK are following pretty similar tracks, with Spain a bit worse off. Germany is easily the best performing country in Europe (and is also the one that has done easily the most testing). China does even better, reflecting the extreme measures they put in place at an early stage (the 11m population of Wuhan was locked down on 23 January when there had only been 17 deaths from Covid-19). South Korea benefited from seeing what was happening in China and used their experience from previous epidemics to institute a major program of tracking and tracing when the first cases appeared. That's enabled them to keep the number of deaths very low.
The graph for the US was in the middle of the pack for the first couple of weeks, but then bends upwards - and that pattern has continued in the last few days since this graph was produced.
A lot of people will defy social gathering bans and be in church Easter Sunday so expect deaths to spike in what about 5 days from then? To be honest I'm not sure how long it takes from when you get it to death. We can be certain that a lot of people will be getting it in mass gatherings like church. A lot of them will get infected and pass it on to others and kill them too.
You can actually have church services and still apply social-distancing. I don't think churches would like limiting attendance but it could be made up for by having more services in a day. The trouble is, in my experience, most churchgoers are the hand-shaking, huggy types and beyond that, the more fundamentalist ones are the types to ignore distancing because "God will protect us!". That Is the problem...
A lot of people will defy social gathering bans and be in church Easter Sunday so expect deaths to spike in what about 5 days from then? To be honest I'm not sure how long it takes from when you get it to death. We can be certain that a lot of people will be getting it in mass gatherings like church. A lot of them will get infected and pass it on to others and kill them too.
You can actually have church services and still apply social-distancing. I don't think churches would like limiting attendance but it could be made up for by having more services in a day. The trouble is, in my experience, most churchgoers are the hand-shaking, huggy types and beyond that, the more fundamentalist ones are the types to ignore distancing because "God will protect us!". That Is the problem...
You can actually have church services and still apply social-distancing. I don't think churches would like limiting attendance but it could be made up for by having more services in a day. The trouble is, in my experience, most churchgoers are the hand-shaking, huggy types and beyond that, the more fundamentalist ones are the types to ignore distancing because "God will protect us!". That Is the problem...
Yeah there's nothing wrong with being religious and wanting church services but the act of physically being together is a terrible idea right now. It's not really social distancing that needs to be enforced to stop the spread of the pandemic - it's physical distancing that we need.
These places won't be enforcing physical distancing safety measures and people will die.
The main problem here being, no one in this country has been leveled with. We're being told fantasy stories. About the virus, and the length of social distancing, and about the steps that would be necessary to get back to a semblance of what came before without a vaccine. I said a long time ago this was the most significant event since World War II. May have been understating it.
On the use of cell phone apps on a mass scale......I mean, if that's what it takes. My phone already knows more about me than I know about myself. We gave up our "privacy" in that regard long ago. But you're going to have so much resistance to it that it won't work how it should. Same goes for mandatory testing every two weeks. There is no indication this Administration is anywhere NEAR being able to facilitate something like that. They aren't even trying.
A lot of people will defy social gathering bans and be in church Easter Sunday so expect deaths to spike in what about 5 days from then? To be honest I'm not sure how long it takes from when you get it to death. We can be certain that a lot of people will be getting it in mass gatherings like church. A lot of them will get infected and pass it on to others and kill them too.
It takes about 2 weeks from the onset of symptoms. That's IF it becomes severe enough to kill you.
About the church thing, yeah. Its gonna happen sadly. I know FAR too much about western religious culture to be optimistic there. At least some churches are being smart. Mine has been doing live streams of the pastor preaching into a camera every week.
Churches and temples must close, in order to set an example. They exist to preserve and celebrate life itself, and so must do this out of principle.
Using streaming and social media is the only way through at the moment, and perhaps could become a regular feature (and rightly so) for the isolated and vulnerable after the disease has passed.
The question is...in the wake of a lockdown, are we further apart than we have ever been, or perhaps are we closer together than we have ever been?
Churches and temples must close, in order to set an example. They exist to preserve and celebrate life itself, and so must do this out of principle.
Using streaming and social media is the only way through at the moment, and perhaps could become a regular feature (and rightly so) for the isolated and vulnerable after the disease has passed.
The question is...in the wake of a lockdown, are we further apart than we have ever been, or perhaps are we closer together than we have ever been?
Unless for certain churches the goal is not, in fact, to preserve and celebrate life, but to fill the collection plate.
I guess it's all anecdotal, but I don't see the Catholic Church, mosques, or synagogues making a fuss about this. It's Protestant Christian churches that have the problem with it. Regardless, carving out "exemptions" for large crowds at churches is flat-out nuts. People literally sitting hip to hip and SINGING for 45 minutes to an hour, and then likely hugging and shaking hands at the end simply on reflex alone. Church is a learned ritual. People won't be able to stop themselves once inside.
Differences in definitions and the extent of testing make international comparisons of reported case numbers difficult. The number of deaths is a bit easier to compare I think. This graph shows progress over time from the 50th death reported by a number of countries.
France, Italy and the UK are following pretty similar tracks, with Spain a bit worse off. Germany is easily the best performing country in Europe (and is also the one that has done easily the most testing). China does even better, reflecting the extreme measures they put in place at an early stage (the 11m population of Wuhan was locked down on 23 January when there had only been 17 deaths from Covid-19). South Korea benefited from seeing what was happening in China and used their experience from previous epidemics to institute a major program of tracking and tracing when the first cases appeared. That's enabled them to keep the number of deaths very low.
The graph for the US was in the middle of the pack for the first couple of weeks, but then bends upwards - and that pattern has continued in the last few days since this graph was produced.
Here's the same graph brought up to date with another 4 days data.
Friday was the day coronavirus became the number one cause of death among Americans and the same day more than 2,000 US citizens die from Covid-19.
During the daily Coronavirus briefing, US president Donald Trump appeared to confuse the viral disease with a bacterial infection which could be treated with antibiotics.
Dangerous idiot Trump had this to say at the Friday Coronavirus briefing:
“This is a very brilliant enemy. You know, it’s a brilliant enemy. They develop drugs like the antibiotics. You see it. Antibiotics used to solve every problem. Now one of the biggest problems the world has is the germ has gotten so brilliant that the antibiotic can’t keep up with it.
"And they're constantly trying to come up with a new – people go to a hospital and they catch – they go for a heart operation – that's no problem, but they end up dying from – from problems. You know the problems I'm talking about. There's a whole genius to it."
Comments
Guidance has flipped from what was originally said which was telling people to not use masks. Now they're saying use them. Don't you agree? If you don't agree, then maybe the early "don't wear masks" narrative is still poisoning your thoughts on the matter.
Again, asymptomatic carriers spread disease and we've known about this since the very early days of the pandemic. In fact, some of the first cases here in America were in Washington are were due to "community spread" with no foreign travel. People without symptoms or mild enough to be walking around have been transmitting the virus since the first known cases. And this has been known in China as well.
Of course you should wear masks and that's what scientific medical advisors advised in many other countries who have done a much better job than we have responding to the pandemic.
Correlation does not imply causation, true. We have had a terrible response and have over 25% of the deaths in the entire world. The United States population is equivalent to 4.25% of the total world population. Is this solely because of masks? That's not clear but it is a possible factor. Another factor could be our for-profit healthcare system sucks ass and our workers rights are terrible and a lot of people don't have sick days and even if they do they can't afford healthcare.
Scratch that, I got mine today. Girlfriend did too. Anyone else?
You got your stimulus package? I didn’t think the IRS had even started that yet. Trump has claimed we should start seeing them next week - maybe some are getting them early?
Here's a huge problem with your smug certainty:
The experts who have read the literature and do not advocate universal mask-wearing are obviously aware of this. So what do they know that you don't?
If the answer was so obvious that you could figure it out, there would be no debate to begin with. To hold otherwise is to claim that large numbers of health experts are stupid, lying or evil. The far more likely explanation is that it isn't that simple and just because you and Donald Trump have strong opinions on what "makes sense" does not mean you're actually right.
Actually, what I've said is that there is no consensus on whether the benefits of universal mask-wearing outweigh the harms. I have no opinion on the matter, because the data isn't there yet. I reserve the right to change my mind when that situation changes.
It amazes me that people are so resistant to the idea that maybe, just maybe, their unprofessional opinions on questions of healthcare policy aren't worth as much as those who actually study the subject. But, again, whatever its source, this contempt for experts is the direct cause of thousands of deaths happening right now.
I think if you really believe the debate on what can or can't be afforded in the long term is going to be shifted substantively by massive spending in a dire emergency, you are doomed to be disappointed.
If anything, history suggests that as soon as the pandemic has substantively ended many people will be calling for massive austerity measures due to how much the government is spending now. And that this call will in fact have some traction because it intuitively makes sense to a lot of the public.
Yup. Sitting in my account right now. Actually not joking.
If Trump said people will see them before Easter, the media would have flipped when they couldn’t find a single person who had received it.
They (the federal government workers pushing out this stimulus package) have obviously been working hard to make sure people get their money as soon as possible.
I think what you describe is what WILL happen (I must have worded it badly). I just happen to think the argument is now utter horseshit. We are conjuring countless trillions of dollars out of thin air. One of my big takeaways from all of this is all the stuff we've told ourselves CAN'T be done was total crap. It doesn't just apply to government spending. We simply weren't doing it because certain people were making a shitload of money off not doing it.
It turned out alot of us COULD work from home. Easily. It turned out ATT doesn't really have to apply data caps to their wireless service. It turns out grocery store clerks actually DO deserve $15.00 an hour. What's pathetic is that it takes a once in a century pandemic to make people realize it. And your'e right, half of them will go right back to their previous thinking whenever this ends (which isn't anytime in the near or even distant future).
Wow this is terrible argument lol. Lets take this a bit at a time, I'll keep it simple on the topic.
The experts are saying to wear a mask now. In the beginning they said no mask. There has been a change, maybe you missed it? I've mentioned it several times now. Maybe that's why you aren't understanding where I'm coming from. And why are you still arguing for a debunked position? I'm suggesting that the new correct position - wear masks - was the correct position the whole time. You are arguing for the position that is not valid anymore - was never valid - and has proven so harmful and deadly.
->
I'd argue that this has always has been obvious. No mask, more spread. Everyone wearing masks? Less spread. I'm not a scientist though. Still.... It's not exactly rocket science.
You are trying to put words in my mouth. I never said "health experts are stupid, lying or evil". That's a conclusion you came to. I said they WERE wrong. They screwed up. You'll agree they've changed their position right (See above). They screwed up. You said they are "stupid lying or evil" not me. I don't agree with your theory there.
I have an opinion and Donald Trump has an opinion, so everyone who has an opinion is Trump, huh?
That's a ridiculous opinion.
You and Donald Trump have strong opinions and that "does not mean you are actually right". But seriously, this line of logic doesn't hold up.
The thread rules state that this thread is not here for people to win arguments with other forumites. This thread is here to share ideas and discuss politics. If you want to do the former, please do so in a PM thread, where it will not clog up the thread and crowd out other discussions.
I wonder how this will affect peoples thinking long term. I can see merit in the idea that people would want a period of austerity, or that they will want a restructuring of society, or that things will just snap back to normal as if it never happened. My future predictions are more wrong than not so I'm making none.
Only 5 hours since you made this post, America has topped 500k cases. Probably be another day before it tops 20% of deaths (presently ~18.6k out of ~102k, going up roughly 2k/day).
New York City, alone, is over 94k cases. That puts it as sixth in the world, by itself, behind only the U.S. (regardless if you keep or subtract NY), Spain, Italy, France, and Germany.
Sure, easy way to spin the numbers. "China is lying." Cause a hubbub over whether or not China's numbers are lying, and to what extent. Basically, "Oh look over there while I run away."
As I've been saying, let's go WAY out on a limb and say China's number are......10x what they actually reported. We would still blow past them within two weeks from now. That's ignoring the obvious under-counting in our own numbers, and assuming the level of China's cooking the books is off the charts. If people are going to say China's numbers aren't real #1) our numbers aren't real either, they're just what we have and #2) they need to specify just HOW badly they think China is lying. Because I'm being incredibly generous with my hypothetical of how badly they are under-reporting.
There is no way to tell as a country we've hit a plateau because there are going to be multiple ones. It has probably been hit in NY because they have been under lockdown the longest after Washington and California (and we need to talk about California, because they are handling this better and earlier than anyone else given their population). People looked the numbers earlier in the week and thought we "hit" it. But now the decrease in net gains per days in New York is being filled in by other parts of the country, and it's going right back up again. Not at a 10-15% clip, but still at about 5%. Some of the hot spots other than New York aren't going to peak for another week or more.
Differences in definitions and the extent of testing make international comparisons of reported case numbers difficult. The number of deaths is a bit easier to compare I think. This graph shows progress over time from the 50th death reported by a number of countries.
The graph for the US was in the middle of the pack for the first couple of weeks, but then bends upwards - and that pattern has continued in the last few days since this graph was produced.
You can actually have church services and still apply social-distancing. I don't think churches would like limiting attendance but it could be made up for by having more services in a day. The trouble is, in my experience, most churchgoers are the hand-shaking, huggy types and beyond that, the more fundamentalist ones are the types to ignore distancing because "God will protect us!". That Is the problem...
You can actually have church services and still apply social-distancing. I don't think churches would like limiting attendance but it could be made up for by having more services in a day. The trouble is, in my experience, most churchgoers are the hand-shaking, huggy types and beyond that, the more fundamentalist ones are the types to ignore distancing because "God will protect us!". That Is the problem...
Yeah there's nothing wrong with being religious and wanting church services but the act of physically being together is a terrible idea right now. It's not really social distancing that needs to be enforced to stop the spread of the pandemic - it's physical distancing that we need.
These places won't be enforcing physical distancing safety measures and people will die.
https://www.vox.com/2020/4/10/21215494/coronavirus-plans-social-distancing-economy-recession-depression-unemployment
The main problem here being, no one in this country has been leveled with. We're being told fantasy stories. About the virus, and the length of social distancing, and about the steps that would be necessary to get back to a semblance of what came before without a vaccine. I said a long time ago this was the most significant event since World War II. May have been understating it.
On the use of cell phone apps on a mass scale......I mean, if that's what it takes. My phone already knows more about me than I know about myself. We gave up our "privacy" in that regard long ago. But you're going to have so much resistance to it that it won't work how it should. Same goes for mandatory testing every two weeks. There is no indication this Administration is anywhere NEAR being able to facilitate something like that. They aren't even trying.
It takes about 2 weeks from the onset of symptoms. That's IF it becomes severe enough to kill you.
About the church thing, yeah. Its gonna happen sadly. I know FAR too much about western religious culture to be optimistic there. At least some churches are being smart. Mine has been doing live streams of the pastor preaching into a camera every week.
Using streaming and social media is the only way through at the moment, and perhaps could become a regular feature (and rightly so) for the isolated and vulnerable after the disease has passed.
The question is...in the wake of a lockdown, are we further apart than we have ever been, or perhaps are we closer together than we have ever been?
Unless for certain churches the goal is not, in fact, to preserve and celebrate life, but to fill the collection plate.
I guess it's all anecdotal, but I don't see the Catholic Church, mosques, or synagogues making a fuss about this. It's Protestant Christian churches that have the problem with it. Regardless, carving out "exemptions" for large crowds at churches is flat-out nuts. People literally sitting hip to hip and SINGING for 45 minutes to an hour, and then likely hugging and shaking hands at the end simply on reflex alone. Church is a learned ritual. People won't be able to stop themselves once inside.
Here's the same graph brought up to date with another 4 days data.
And I'm proud to be an American
Where at least I know I'm free
And I won't forget the men who died
To re-open the econameee…
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/fauci-refuses-to-say-when-it-would-be-safe-to-reopen-trumps-mouth
During the daily Coronavirus briefing, US president Donald Trump appeared to confuse the viral disease with a bacterial infection which could be treated with antibiotics.
Dangerous idiot Trump had this to say at the Friday Coronavirus briefing:
“This is a very brilliant enemy. You know, it’s a brilliant enemy. They develop drugs like the antibiotics. You see it. Antibiotics used to solve every problem. Now one of the biggest problems the world has is the germ has gotten so brilliant that the antibiotic can’t keep up with it.
"And they're constantly trying to come up with a new – people go to a hospital and they catch – they go for a heart operation – that's no problem, but they end up dying from – from problems. You know the problems I'm talking about. There's a whole genius to it."