Coronavirus Thread

[WreckinGT]

Has any government official on the planet even suggested that things should go back to the way they were before right now?

You are talking as if all social distancing guidelines are being removed immediately. I do think there should be more communication about what the new guidelines actually are. I do think that requiring everyone in public to wear a face covering is probably a good idea. Why can't we talk about what limited reduction in restrictions can possibly take place? Why can't we discuss the failure of the governor and the press of detailing what the new guidelines are? There is too much politics being played by everyone. It is one-"side" vs the other-"side". Let's please have actual detailed discussion instead of political drivel.

On March 23rd we announced that bars and nightclubs were banned and that gatherings of over 10 people were banned. That apparently was not enough as we then ordered a shelter in place for everyone on April 2nd. What in your opinion lead to the shelter in place? If trusting everyone with a limited set of restrictions is a viable solution then why did we implement a tougher policy shortly after?

 

[herb]

FWIW, Cuomo is on now discussing a regional approach to reopening/reimagining New York.

They're also flashing stats that are trending in the right direction.

Unemployment IT systems has collapsed under volume, but NY has 1,000 people taking phone calls and emails to make progress. Benefits are retroactive.

Despite the **** show here in NYC, where I think I'm 6 more weeks of work from home, I have faith in the state leadership.

De Blasio is a clown, but Cuomo has his act together.

One reason it is regional there is that if Connecticut, etc open up then they could face a flood of New Yorkers looking for those things they can’t get. So it makes for them to work cooperatively

 

[684Bee]

On March 23rd we announced that bars and nightclubs were banned and that gatherings of over 10 people were banned. That apparently was not enough as we then ordered a shelter in place for everyone on April 2nd. What in your opinion lead to the shelter in place? If trusting everyone with a limited set of restrictions is a viable solution then why did we implement a tougher policy shortly after?

Because people were acting off of the information they had at that time, some of it not so good or accurate. This has been very fluid. We know more now. Still incomplete, but we know more.

 

[slugboy]

Except a month ago, epidemiologists were saying that it isn't a death/sickness decision. The virus will cause some number of sickness and death no matter how flat the curve is. The only death benefit of slowing things down was preventing deaths from lack of access to medical care if the medical system was overwhelmed.

I thought one of the things we were getting with “shelter in place” was a chance for the medical infrastructure to build up and prepare. We definitely haven’t done what China did (building emergency hospital capacity at large scale). We have allocated space in the Georgia World Congress Center for extra “lite” ventilator/recovery space. I’m sure the hospitals put some plans in place.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

Then quit or find another job.

Ah yes, you must live in something other than the real world. I envy you.

 

[Pointer]

...
I also don't get some people saying things like, "I don't see how a massage therapist, etc. can safely do business". How did they safely operate before? When you went to get a massage, haircut, etc. in the past, did you know the health status of every person in the place? No, you didn't. Were there tons of germs in there then? Yes, there was. So, you were taking a risk then, and you will be now. I just don't see that the risk-reward decision has gotten that much worse for the vast majority of people (with what we know now).

Are you taking about back before a pandemic virus was spreading? Yes I don't think people were to worried about massages, going to the movies or bowling allies back then.
Please just look at the facts. This is a very tough situation. On the one hand, we have an economy that is getting hammered. The fix for that means putting many people in harms way. It's a balancing act for sure. I just think at this time, it's way too early to be opening things back up. All of Kemp's tax cuts are suddenly looking like a pretty bad move, but then again who could predict a pandemic happening (other then bill gates).

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Ah yes, you must live in something other than the real world. I envy you.

The assertion I was responding to was a false assumption to start with - that someone currently out of work would somehow be forced into having to take a job that was unsafe.

 

[herb]

All of Kemp's tax cuts are suddenly looking like a pretty bad move

Much better for the government to have the money than the people who actually earned it and could use it to buy things they need

 

[takethepoints]

Dont pull South Carolina into this - our situation is once again being falsely reported. We’re opening certain businesses...........but that’s not the entire story. Masks should be worn and social distancing should be followed. No more than 5 people per 1,000 square feet of space - max capacity is limited to 20% of normal. And so on. As usual, none of those important details were reported in the news last night. It’s just like when they said we instituted a stay-at-home order...30 days after we actually did.

I wouldn't pull South Carolina into anything.

Good to know about the restrictions. Problem = there are too many businesses being opened at once. And "should" is not the auxiliary verb I'd like to see used under these conditions. "Must" would be more like it.

 

[RonJohn]

On March 23rd we announced that bars and nightclubs were banned and that gatherings of over 10 people were banned. That apparently was not enough as we then ordered a shelter in place for everyone on April 2nd. What in your opinion lead to the shelter in place? If trusting everyone with a limited set of restrictions is a viable solution then why did we implement a tougher policy shortly after?

Once again, that is avoiding the true question. The true question is: What limitations are necessary at this moment to keep the disease from over stressing the medical system? Contrary to how you are wording things, nobody is suggesting that we lift all restrictions and go back to the way things were.

When the governor reopened Tybee Island beaches, the reports were that the beaches looked like Spring Break. When looking at actual pictures of Tybee Island after it was reopened, it looked almost deserted with some people walking around. Is there a large risk of people walking 20 feed apart on a beach spreading the disease? If not, why can people walking 20 feet apart not be allowed? Is there a risk of people spreading the disease if they are standing in a crowded fashion at the Michigan capital without masks? If so, why are they doing that? There is absolutely no reason for the government to prohibit activities that pose little to no risk.(surfing alone?) There is absolutely no reason for people to gather in a crowd for some kind of political statement. If people would try to use good judgement instead of drawing political lines in the sand, we could actually ease some calculated restrictions and still stay below the medical system stress line.

 

[Pointer]

Much better for the government to have the money than the people who actually earned it and could use it to buy things they need

I think the urgency in Kemp's reopening plan has to do with how low the reserves are currently.

Before this turns into a political thing, that's not what I intended. I think tax cuts are good when appropriate and vice versa. I was merely pointing out that in this case it was unfortunately and unforeseeably bad timing.

 

[RonJohn]

Problem = there are too many businesses being opened at once.

If the capacity, distancing, and mask requirements are effective at limiting spread of infections, how many businesses are too many?

 

[bobongo]

We will never be an Orwellian police state like South Korea. Terrible illustration.

South Korea is an Orwellian police state? You've outdone yourself, bwelbo. That's North Korea.

 

[BleedGoldNWhite21]

The assertion I was responding to was a false assumption to start with - that someone currently out of work would somehow be forced into having to take a job that was unsafe.

I personally know two people who are dealing with the exact scenario I brought up four hours after Kemp made his announcement. And no, they can’t just quit their job.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I wouldn't pull South Carolina into anything.

Good to know about the restrictions. Problem = there are too many businesses being opened at once. And "should" is not the auxiliary verb I'd like to see used under these conditions. "Must" would be more like it.

Well I don't know what to tell you. You can never force anybody to wear a mask or social distance or not break the speed limit or not do pretty much anything, unless you back it by police or military force. Also, I don't know what information you're using to say too many businesses are being opened at once. Remember there are capacity limits, so 1,000 people for example couldn't all go shop at TJ Maxx at the same time. You have to stand outside in a line 6 feet apart after the store reaches 5 people per 1,000 square feet or 20% capacity.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I personally know two people who are dealing with the exact scenario I brought up four hours after Kemp made his announcement. And no, they can’t just quit their job.

Can you please explain more? So you're not working, sitting at home taking unemployment. Now certain stores start opening back up, the type you used to work at. Can you explain again why you'd have to take a job at one that you deem unsafe?

 

[LibertyTurns]

What demographics are you speaking of, Tom Hanks, George Stephanopoulous, his wife, Brook Baldwin ,Cuomo, the WHITE congress member in Utah.

Let me spell it out for you because you must not have read or heard anything about this pandemic. The demographics at highest risk are:

a. Old and sick
b. Morbidly obese
c. Diabetes
d. Heart conditions
e. Immunodeficiency type diseases

You been watching/reading the news, talked to anyone at all lately? The morbidity stats on the above are atrocious.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

South Korea is an Orwellian police state? You've outdone yourself, bwelbo. That's North Korea.

You should read what South Korea is doing. If you test positive, they publish your name in newspapers and on the web (that would break laws here). The police visit you frequently to make sure you're in quarantine. They track you via GPS, credit card transactions, and video surveillance to ensure compliance. I'm not kidding - just google it. Yes that is an Orweillian police state.

 

[bobongo]

Can you please explain more? So you're not working, sitting at home taking unemployment. Now certain stores start opening back up, the type you used to work at before they became unsafe. Can you explain again why you'd have to take a job at one that you deem unsafe?

FIFY

 

[Deleted member 2897]

FIFY

That doesn't change the question - why would you be REQUIRED to go back and work somewhere if you think its unsafe?