Coronavirus Thread

[Buzzbomb]

High density large population.

...with a high concentration of International Travelers.

 

[Milwaukee]

My local Pick N Save and Walmart are completely out of bread, eggs, and frozen pizzas. People need to calm down and stop over buying.

Just wanted to make a damn turkey sando. Smh

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

OK, OK. "Equivalency" now falsely applies to life and death health decisions. One has nothing to do with the other. I read some local doctors brush it off, but when NHS and CDC specialists issue stark warnings, it is time to listen. It is their profession, and unlike a certain someone I trust specialists. If you are very young you probably have little worry. Young adults, not much. It gets worse as you get older. If you have no concern for older people who may have underlying health conditions -- heart, lung, for instance -- then at least try not to spread it to them. For some denial is the worst medicine.

My problem with this is if the NHS and CDC specialists are now issuing stark warnings, why the hell did they drag their feet in producing and distributing the test kits, even going so low as to refuse to accept the WHO test kits? They could have gone a long way several weeks ago in allaying fears about the spread of the virus and possibly even preventing at least some of the spread.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Mods if someone has a better place for this response, feel free to move it.

Thalidomide is a great example, but here’s my cut:

1. Government has a Constitutional authority to establish justice.....promote the General Welfare and secure the blessings of Liberty.

2. We have a system where the following is supposed to happen: Congress passes laws with their authority provided by the Constitution, companies abide by them, lawbreaking is punished civilly or criminally, etc.

* Thalidomide was developed by a private company.
* That company had a responsibility to test appropriately to make sure it was effective & not harmful.
* Instances where companies do not produce good products, have unintended consequences, etc should get punished by mechanisms already in place without having extraordinary regulations & massive government bureaucracies.
- Severe instances they lose customers & go out of business- sued & assets seizes and given to those harmed
- Perhaps their conduct was criminal- Execs in charge get prosecuted & jailed

What happens is businesses, because of political shenanigans perpetuated by a corrupt system get off with little to no accountability.

What if the Execs at the company that made Thalidomide were jailed for life & all their personal assets were seized/company bankrupted as damages? Wouldn’t companies behave differently? Why does government have to create a myriad of rules to prevent companies for doing stuff like this? A bunch of disgraced, jailed & penniless Execs whose families are ruined should be enough to promote proper behavior.

Smaller government would drastically reduce politically motivated decisions & generate a much higher of marketplace derived decisions. Who was pressuring the FDA in the case of Thalidomide? I’ll tell you: a person(s) with huge power & little accountability. Who are they bribing, politicians? If the politicians had greatly reduced authority to intervene, the hugely powerful businessman would have no one to bribe to attain a favorable decision. He’d be left to making a decision & suffering the consequences.

You’re advocating a system with increased propensity for graft & corruption, I’m on the other side of the spectrum. You want more politicians, being bribed by more companies in more instances due to more expansive regulations the politicians are voting on, etc. Makes no sense to me that any rational individual would want that type of system or more of it. Think how insane that is- the east qualified person on the face of the earth to make a decision is a politician & you want more of them making more decisions. The second least qualified person to make a decision is a career government bureaucrat. You want more of them making more bad decisions. Crazy.

TOTALLY agree with every word you said. The key words in that post are "smaller government".

 

[Deleted member 2897]

My problem with this is if the NHS and CDC specialists are now issuing stark warnings, why the hell did they drag their feet in producing and distributing the test kits, even going so low as to refuse to accept the WHO test kits? They could have gone a long way several weeks ago in allaying fears about the spread of the virus and possibly even preventing at least some of the spread.

probably just the usual incompetence. There are a lot of laws and regulations around this, and they probably only have control over a subset of them.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I don't expect the NCAA to allow extra practices in the fall. i just hope things are to a point where they can have practices and games in the fall.

If things happen how the health care system wants them to happen then you will have a longer period of the virus circulating, but fewer people dying because the health system isn't overwhelmed. (flattening the curve as they like to call it)
But that might mean 6-9 months of reduced events and activities with large groups of people.

I saw a chart that someone made tracking every European country and the US from the first day they hit 600 positive tests. Italy was the first country to hit that back on Feb 27. US hit that on March 9th. The growth rates are eerily similar for every country. Almost every country is tracking at or above what Italy is seeing for the same day (Spain is the one that is well above Italy's rate).

If this social distancing experiment does not work we are a little over a week from a very serious health crisis that could overwhelm the system. Right now Italy has just 1 ventilator for every 8 people who need one. I also saw a tweet this morning with someone who was talking to health officials. The health officials believe NYC may be less than a week from having its health care system overwhelmed and needing to go to a Italy style shutdown.

I am getting more and more adjusted to the thought that there will not be any sports until at least this fall (or at least none with people in the stands).

I heard a few nights ago that we already have a serious shortage of ventilators in the country, so things could get very bad very quickly. And once again it is the fault of the CDC, the NHS, and similar government-run health agencies. And people want increased government control of health services why???

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Trump trying to pay a German company working on a vaccine to move here and to develop and sell it only to the US. TDS is also a global pandemic.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/germany-tries-stop-u-luring-113633629.html

 

[RamblinRed]

Not to get too into politics, but it is largely the fault of the potential pandemic not being taken seriously by the government.
The countries that have done best with this implemented testing on everyone very quickly and isolated people incredibly rapidly. (Think South Korea and Singapore).

The biggest misstep was the US treating it the same way China did its first month in that country - basic denying there was an issue and ignoring those who were giving warning signs (and in many cases attacking the messenger). Refusing the testing kits from the WHO weeks ago was a big misstep that we still haven't recovered from. We are testing so few people we really have no good sense have how fast it is spreading and where hot spots are popping up. Right now we are in a place were we are playing from behind rather than having the opportunity to get out in front of it.

I saw a chart this morning where someone was tracking the spread in European countries and the US based on when they first crossed 600 positive cases. That was Feb 27th in italy. March 9th in the US. Every country on the chart the spread was basically the same as Italy's, with the exception of Germany (which was somewhat higher) and Spain (which is spreading twice as fast as italy).

if the current social distancing does not work, just look to italy to see what it is going to be like in most European countries and the US in 2 weeks.
China was only able to get it under control by basically shutting down their country. People were required to stay in their homes- no work, no school, no social activities. if they left the Army was there to make sure they got back inside. Food was delivered to buildings. That extreme quarantine and isolation worked - but it took 2 months.

 

[CHE90]

My local Pick N Save and Walmart are completely out of bread, eggs, and frozen pizzas. People need to calm down and stop over buying.

Just wanted to make a damn turkey sando. Smh

I'm going to my golf club. Probably the safest place right now since they've implemented unprecedented measure of moving tee times from 5 minutes apart to 6 minutes apart to avoid 3 or more groups from being backed up on a single tee box. I'm also banking on the clubhouse having a turkey sandwich.

 

[takethepoints]

(2) Is this a 2,3,4+.... sigma occurrence? Do you "plan" for such an unknown? How? At what cost vis-a-vis other known diseases? How many fatal auto accidents have NOT occurred due to social distancing, temporary shutdowns, etc., leading to less driving, CO emissions, etc.?

Yes, this is a "black swan" event. But … how do you plan for it? A good start would be to maintain the NSC unit dedicated to planning for pandemic disease. That outfit would have been able to coordinate the entire federal - and, by extension, state and local - response to a new disease threat. That's why it was created and presidential powers to get the ball rolling would have been a signature away.

But we know what happened there. Too bad. Lives will be lost as a cosequence.

 

[jwsavhGT]

Walmart is cutting store hours starting Sunday at its locations across the U.S. due to COVID-19.

Stores normally open 24 hours will be open from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. until further notice, the company said late Saturday. Other stores, which are typically open until midnight, will also have reduced hours.

"This will help ensure associates are able to stock the products our customers are looking for and to perform cleaning and sanitizing," Dacona Smith, executive vice president and chief operating officer, Walmart U.S., wrote in a blog post.

However, not all of Walmart's 5,000-plus stores are affected by the change. Stores that operate under more reduced hours will keep their current hours of operation, Walmart said. Some stores, for example, regularly close at 10 p.m. or open at 7 a.m.

 

[Skeptic]

Trump trying to pay a German company working on a vaccine to move here and to develop and sell it only to the US. TDS is also a global pandemic.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/germany-tries-stop-u-luring-113633629.html

That is absurd beyond even cultish belief. Any vaccine must be vetted and tested or it might kill more than a virus. It must be approved for U.S. use and even Trump cannot order it distributed. That is Trump the reality tv host strutting about.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

A little levity in a crisis never hurts ---

 

[Skeptic]

TOTALLY agree with every word you said. The key words in that post are "smaller government".

We all want "smaller government". Your government. My government? Not so much.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

We all want "smaller government". Your government. My government? Not so much.

The left definitely does not want smaller government.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

That is absurd beyond even cultish belief. Any vaccine must be vetted and tested or it might kill more than a virus. It must be approved for U.S. use and even Trump cannot order it distributed. That is Trump the reality tv host strutting about.

My argument is that Trump never actually said that. It’s a single anonymous source (of course). It’s the typical HE SAID X, it gets reported, then you find out it never actually happened.

 

[Techster]

 

[takethepoints]

You’re advocating a system with increased propensity for graft & corruption, I’m on the other side of the spectrum. You want more politicians, being bribed by more companies in more instances due to more expansive regulations the politicians are voting on, etc. Makes no sense to me that any rational individual would want that type of system or more of it. Think how insane that is- the east qualified person on the face of the earth to make a decision is a politician & you want more of them making more decisions. The second least qualified person to make a decision is a career government bureaucrat. You want more of them making more bad decisions. Crazy.

You can bribe politicians, at least indirectly. We've made our election financing controls so lax that's possible. But … most politicians operate using Unruh's Rule (he was long time speaker of the California House): "Look, kid. If you can't eat their food, drink their liquor, take their money and still vote against them, you don't belong here." (Btw, I left some of this out.) The shoe is usually on the other foot; people and businesses pony up the money for campaigns because they are afraid of what might happen if they don't.

But you're way, way wrong about career civil servants, especially in scientific fields. The federal government has the highest concentration of expertise of any organization in the country. That expertise is further hemmed in by the regulations it enforces and the consensus of scientific opinion. What you are thinking about (I think) are the political appointees that take over as administrations shift. They very often - especially in one administration we know - know next to nothing about what the agencies they are supposed to be directing are doing. It often takes years to get them up to speed as well. (An example: Wilbur Ross took over as Commerce Secretary under the impression that he would be running the agency responsible for trade policy. Instead of, you know, the agency in charge of gathering and reporting most of the nation's statistics. Trade policy is handled out of the White House.) So, yes, giving them the power we have is a mistake and a bad one. But the federal civil service line employees are, in general, well trained and expert in their fields. True, that means they get in people's faces regularly. That's their job. Governments exist to regulate.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

You can bribe politicians, at least indirectly. We've made our election financing controls so lax that's possible. But … most politicians operate using Unruh's Rule (he was long time speaker of the California House): "Look, kid. If you can't eat their food, drink their liquor, take their money and still vote against them, you don't belong here." (Btw, I left some of this out.) The shoe is usually on the other foot; people and businesses pony up the money for campaigns because they are afraid of what might happen if they don't.

But you're way, way wrong about career civil servants, especially in scientific fields. The federal government has the highest concentration of expertise of any organization in the country. That expertise is further hemmed in by the regulations it enforces and the consensus of scientific opinion. What you are thinking about are the political appointees that take over as administrations shift. They very often - especially in one administration we know - know next to nothing about what the agencies they are supposed to be directing are doing. It often takes years to get them up to speed as well. (An example: Wilbur Ross took over as Commerce Secretary under the impression that he would be running the agency responsible for trade policy. Instead of, you know, the agency in charge of gathering and reporting most of the nation's statistics. Trade policy is usually handled out of the White House.) So, yes, giving them the power we have is a mistake and a bad one. But the federal civil service line employees are, in general, well trained and expert in their fields. True, that means they get in people's faces regularly. That's their job. Governments exist to regulate.

Yep, this is similar to the FBI (and school systems and so on). The agents on the ground are largely talented, professional people. But the administration at the top is dirty and corrupt.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

You can bribe politicians, at least indirectly. We've made our election financing controls so lax that's possible. But … most politicians operate using Unruh's Rule (he was long time speaker of the California House): "Look, kid. If you can't eat their food, drink their liquor, take their money and still vote against them, you don't belong here." (Btw, I left some of this out.) The shoe is usually on the other foot; people and businesses pony up the money for campaigns because they are afraid of what might happen if they don't.

But you're way, way wrong about career civil servants, especially in scientific fields. The federal government has the highest concentration of expertise of any organization in the country. That expertise is further hemmed in by the regulations it enforces and the consensus of scientific opinion. What you are thinking about (I think) are the political appointees that take over as administrations shift. They very often - especially in one administration we know - know next to nothing about what the agencies they are supposed to be directing are doing. It often takes years to get them up to speed as well. (An example: Wilbur Ross took over as Commerce Secretary under the impression that he would be running the agency responsible for trade policy. Instead of, you know, the agency in charge of gathering and reporting most of the nation's statistics. Trade policy is handled out of the White House.) So, yes, giving them the power we have is a mistake and a bad one. But the federal civil service line employees are, in general, well trained and expert in their fields. True, that means they get in people's faces regularly. That's their job. Governments exist to regulate.

I guess you are not familiar with the long sordid history of the CDC. I don't know if it's been the scientists in that organization or the politically appointed administrators of it, but they have often done far more bad than good.