Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 24, 2020 16:33:03 GMT -5
justify deaths. justify deaths.
ok, let me ask a different way: acceptable by what standard?
I heard (I watched their mouth move saying the words that amounted to these justifications 1.) People die everyday. Covid19 isn't any different than other things that kill you. When it's your time it's your time. Implies that there isn't anything anyone can do about this. 2.) It's killing old people who are close to death - with a side of it's killing people who are getting what they deserve because they are "lazy" and aren't taking care of themselves - they are obese and have diabetes and bad hearts. So, it's their own fault. Implies that there isn't anything anyone can do about this. 3.) It's not killing kids. Kids are immune to it. (yeah, I know, no need to comment on this). Implies that it's not that bad (only people who deserve to die are dying - not innocent kids). And probably the most important reason it's ok that people are dying from Covid19: 4.) In America, scientists said MILLIONS would die - and then 500K would die and then 250K would die. ONLY 180K have died. That's way less than 250K - we're doing a great job! We're winning! That's why it's acceptable to have such a high death rate. We have fewer deaths than "predicted" - it's not that bad. My experience- 2) The old people who died at our facility were not necessarily close to death. Many of them might have lived years more if not for Covid. Yeah some of the people who died are heavy, but two folks I knew who survived were in the category and just ended up alot thinner. Most of those who had a serious case for more than a week generally lost weight, some tens of pounds. 3) Kids are dying now, and those numbers obviously will go up. Florida seems to have some experience with kids dying from Covid. Sadly I get the #4 argument. Given Trump likes to exaggerate and blow up numbers, I'm sure this resonates with his base who probably never listened to real projections, just Trumpisms. Given our numbers are so bad compared to most countries and we are not where it started, we are that bad. Real real bad.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 24, 2020 16:34:17 GMT -5
Merica isn't South Korea. pity, that. They have pretty good movies, food, and pop music.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 24, 2020 16:34:25 GMT -5
It's also hitting people of color particularly hard too. They often have less access to good care and underlying conditions. I'm guessing that those losses are acceptable to a lot of people. Unless that's part of your comment on culling the herd. In general saying something affects people of colour more negatively than rich white people makes no impact on Conservatives. It's back to that survival of the fittest thing. These are people that believe that the goal is to conquer the world and they have no ethical problem with that. They believe everyone would do it if the could and basically the losers are just whiners. In their minds they won fair and square. Or not, fair doesn't really matter. I am not feeling well after reading this.
but again, it makes sense.
thanks for your candor.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 24, 2020 16:35:55 GMT -5
They have pretty good movies, food, and pop music. they also have six deaths per million.
you read that right.
six.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 24, 2020 16:38:48 GMT -5
It isn't only the people who will die. It's the people who will have horrible, permanent problems after surviving a bad bout of the virus. Can you say "preexisting conditions"? The Trumpers don't apparently follow non Trump news so they are clueless of how bad various medical folk think it might be. Permanent lung damage, permanent heart damage and even permanent brain damage have been theorized as possible and even likely. Maybe we need to emphasize these impending permanent conditions will make their insurance premiums go up. They generally listen to their pocketbooks unless of course Trump is stealing from them. Just made myself sad. Nevermind.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 24, 2020 16:47:36 GMT -5
ok, one more question:
I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that.
the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too).
my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING") was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 40-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that?
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Aug 24, 2020 16:54:02 GMT -5
In general saying something affects people of colour more negatively than rich white people makes no impact on Conservatives. It's back to that survival of the fittest thing. These are people that believe that the goal is to conquer the world and they have no ethical problem with that. They believe everyone would do it if the could and basically the losers are just whiners. In their minds they won fair and square. Or not, fair doesn't really matter. I am not feeling well after reading this.
but again, it makes sense.
thanks for your candor.
The take away from that is for people that are not rich white men to stick together and quit squabbling over stupid shit amongst ourselves. They divide and conquer us way to easily.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 24, 2020 16:54:52 GMT -5
ok, one more question: I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that. the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too). my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING" was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 30-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that? Yep, early when the numbers from China started to come out that was the worst case projections if the virus was allowed to run unabated. As the local doctors and scientists started working with cases, and ask the effects of staying in place, social distancing and masks came about, the numbers started to drop. At the current rate that we are heading, this morning I heard that the estimate would be 309K US deaths before Dec. 1. That puts it at ~0.1% of the US population.
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Aug 24, 2020 16:59:02 GMT -5
ok, one more question: I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that. the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too). my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING") was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 40-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that? I never read any solid predictions. But I remember the look on our Conservative Premier's face the day he announced we we taking emergency measures and shutting down the province. He was scared. When a reporter asked him if this was really necessary he said something like "I've seen the reports and if we don't there will be a lot of people dying" My personal worst case was 1918 numbers.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,416
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Aug 24, 2020 17:10:13 GMT -5
ok, one more question: I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that. the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too). my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING") was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 40-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that? Walk is correct. Original projections was 2.2 million dead if we did nothing. So, yes, we are better than that, but is mediocre now our goal? Estimate is that those who died lost about 10 years of life
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 24, 2020 18:34:16 GMT -5
ok, one more question: I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that. the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too). my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING") was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 40-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that? Walk is correct. Original projections was 2.2 million dead if we did nothing. So, yes, we are better than that, but is mediocre now our goal? Estimate is that those who died lost about 10 years of life yeah, you have said that before, pmd. but here is the thing, I REALLY don't remember it. now it could be that I was not paying attention. it could also be that I didn't take it seriously. I can't honestly say.
I am just trying to trace the claim. if anyone can provide a link, I would appreciate it.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 24, 2020 18:44:41 GMT -5
Walk is correct. Original projections was 2.2 million dead if we did nothing. So, yes, we are better than that, but is mediocre now our goal? Estimate is that those who died lost about 10 years of life yeah, you have said that before, pmd. but here is the thing, I REALLY don't remember it. now it could be that I was not paying attention. it could also be that I didn't take it seriously. I can't honestly say.
I am just trying to trace the claim. if anyone can provide a link, I would appreciate it.
I don't remember that estimate either.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 24, 2020 18:46:02 GMT -5
Walk is correct. Original projections was 2.2 million dead if we did nothing. So, yes, we are better than that, but is mediocre now our goal? Estimate is that those who died lost about 10 years of life yeah, you have said that before, pmd. but here is the thing, I REALLY don't remember it. now it could be that I was not paying attention. it could also be that I didn't take it seriously. I can't honestly say.
I am just trying to trace the claim. if anyone can provide a link, I would appreciate it.
How One Model Simulated 2.2 Million U.S. Deaths from COVID-19
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,416
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Aug 24, 2020 18:47:46 GMT -5
Walk is correct. Original projections was 2.2 million dead if we did nothing. So, yes, we are better than that, but is mediocre now our goal? Estimate is that those who died lost about 10 years of life yeah, you have said that before, pmd. but here is the thing, I REALLY don't remember it. now it could be that I was not paying attention. it could also be that I didn't take it seriously. I can't honestly say.
I am just trying to trace the claim. if anyone can provide a link, I would appreciate it.
Estimate was from Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College of London. Can find citation by the Cato institute at Cato.org
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Aug 24, 2020 18:59:23 GMT -5
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Aug 24, 2020 19:48:14 GMT -5
ok, one more question: I keep seeing people claim that "doctors said" "millions would die", but I REALLY don't remember that. the original projections were that 60-70k would die. Birx said 100-240k (she should be congratulated for that), a number that Trump repeated (that surprised me too). my own internal worst case scenario (you can find it on the board. I said "if we do NOTHING") was 1M dead. the absolute worst case I can think of is 40-60% of us get it, and 1.5% die. that is 2-3M. did anyone actually ever say that? Trump has said that many times to make it look like he has done a great job. He is a savior!
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Aug 25, 2020 9:52:38 GMT -5
I was just reading an article that reported the 57% of Republicans say it's acceptable. the same article says 33% of Democrats say it's acceptable. I kind of get that. I often think we think our ability to thwart nature is better than it is. It always amazes me when people say the government should have fixed it when a natural disaster hits. Folks some things are out of our control. I have also thought that sometimes we take it too far sustaining life no matter what. I don't think death is the worst thing that can happen to someone. Quality of life counts. I still believe in social distancing and wearing face masks, we don't have to let Covid wipe us out.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Aug 25, 2020 10:13:54 GMT -5
I was just reading an article that reported the 57% of Republicans say it's acceptable. ...
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,373
|
Post by Tiny on Aug 25, 2020 10:39:05 GMT -5
The US population was about 103 million in 1918. The US population is about 330 million in 2020. Deaths per million is a better indicator than total deaths.
|
|
laterbloomer
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2018 0:50:42 GMT -5
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by laterbloomer on Aug 25, 2020 10:39:35 GMT -5
I was just reading an article that reported the 57% of Republicans say it's acceptable. ... The new information is that 33% of Democrats think it is acceptable. That is 1/3. That is significant
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,373
|
Post by Tiny on Aug 25, 2020 10:48:10 GMT -5
I heard (I watched their mouth move saying the words that amounted to these justifications 1.) People die everyday. Covid19 isn't any different than other things that kill you. When it's your time it's your time. Implies that there isn't anything anyone can do about this. 2.) It's killing old people who are close to death - with a side of it's killing people who are getting what they deserve because they are "lazy" and aren't taking care of themselves - they are obese and have diabetes and bad hearts. So, it's their own fault. Implies that there isn't anything anyone can do about this. 3.) It's not killing kids. Kids are immune to it. (yeah, I know, no need to comment on this). Implies that it's not that bad (only people who deserve to die are dying - not innocent kids). And probably the most important reason it's ok that people are dying from Covid19: 4.) In America, scientists said MILLIONS would die - and then 500K would die and then 250K would die. ONLY 180K have died. That's way less than 250K - we're doing a great job! We're winning! That's why it's acceptable to have such a high death rate. We have fewer deaths than "predicted" - it's not that bad. you know what? a lot of this makes sense. a combination of fatalism, survivalism, and a failure to meet the worst case scenario.
got it.
I guess that is what happens when you never look outside your own country for possible solutions to problems.
this thread is really making me negative on America.
I agree with you. The thing is those things are NOT American ideals. Well, not the ones I was taught (brought up with?). I was brought up with the The Land of Plenty and a way for everyone to build a better life. Cooperation (community), Compassion, Fairness/Justice. All the States working together (that whole United States part) to create a good life for every one.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,416
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Aug 25, 2020 12:10:23 GMT -5
I was just reading an article that reported the 57% of Republicans say it's acceptable. the same article says 33% of Democrats say it's acceptable. I kind of get that. I often think we think our ability to thwart nature is better than it is. It always amazes me when people say the government should have fixed it when a natural disaster hits. Folks some things are out of our control. I have also thought that sometimes we take it too far sustaining life no matter what. I don't think death is the worst thing that can happen to someone. Quality of life counts. I still believe in social distancing and wearing face masks, we don't have to let Covid wipe us out. If that’s the case, why evacuate before a hurricane? Why fight forest fires? We can mitigate the effects of this virus if we try. When you look at the total number of deaths, it looks so big, we feel there is nothing to be done. But, life expectancy has improved by 30 years in the last 100. We have the ability to alter the course if disease. What we currently lack is the will to do so. In addition, all these people who do not care about the virus increase the risk to healthcare workers, both physical and psychological. The number who will retire or leave the profession when this is over will be stunning. Replacing that experience will be a problem for all of us
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Aug 25, 2020 12:19:07 GMT -5
On a positive note for the 57% number... Trump frequently states that 94 to 95 percent of the Republicans approve of what he is doing. So only 57 percent is a huge drop from that support. I agree, but it still doesn't answer the question:
why is 180k dead Americans acceptable?
I HONESTLY don't get it. seriously.
I don’t think it’s acceptable as much is unavoidable. We are an international country, so we didn’t have the option of closing our borders like New Zealand did. And we have these ideas about individual liberty and states rights that make it more difficult to mount a national response. And all the feds could’ve done a lot of things a lot better. So many people have come to expect incompetence from the federal government. In my little red state, we shut down I think before New York did, and the schools immediately started providing sack breakfast and lunch to school kids, handing out chrome books to kids who didn’t have computers at home, and did a pretty damn good job teaching during the lockdown. I was so impressed that I pulled my daughter out of the private school and put her in a public school this year. Local officials immediately started partnering with businesses to make sure testing was free and easy. Everybody I know who’s had a fever or cough was sent for testing, which takes less than an hour, and got the results back in 1 to 2 days. The nursing homes were locked down very early on, which drastically reduce the hospitalizations and deaths. And the health department is being pretty aggressive with contact tracing. This didn’t happen because the feds came in and rescued us . This happened because local government officials were in Covid meetings hammering this out long before the shut down, and probably had loose plans in place for pandemics years ago. And while my state isn’t as poor as Mississippi, we also don’t have hordes of one percenters paying skyhigh taxes like the East and West Coast does. Other than the states that were hit first, the idea that this couldn’t have been handled without a huge federal response it’s pretty laughable when you live in a state that has competent local government. I feel bad for you guys that are paying blue state taxes and getting a Mississippi level of competence.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,193
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 25, 2020 12:49:24 GMT -5
I agree, but it still doesn't answer the question:
why is 180k dead Americans acceptable?
I HONESTLY don't get it. seriously.
I don’t think it’s acceptable as much is unavoidable. We are an international country, so we didn’t have the option of closing our borders like New Zealand did. And we have these ideas about individual liberty and states rights that make it more difficult to mount a national response. And all the feds could’ve done a lot of things a lot better. So many people have come to expect incompetence from the federal government. In my little red state, we shut down I think before New York did, and the schools immediately started providing sack breakfast and lunch to school kids, handing out chrome books to kids who didn’t have computers at home, and did a pretty damn good job teaching during the lockdown. I was so impressed that I pulled my daughter out of the private school and put her in a public school this year. Local officials immediately started partnering with businesses to make sure testing was free and easy. Everybody I know who’s had a fever or cough was sent for testing, which takes less than an hour, and got the results back in 1 to 2 days. The nursing homes were locked down very early on, which drastically reduce the hospitalizations and deaths. And the health department is being pretty aggressive with contact tracing. This didn’t happen because the feds came in and rescued us . This happened because local government officials were in Covid meetings hammering this out long before the shut down, and probably had loose plans in place for pandemics years ago. And while my state isn’t as poor as Mississippi, we also don’t have hordes of one percenters paying skyhigh taxes like the East and West Coast does. Other than the states that were hit first, the idea that this couldn’t have been handled without a huge federal response it’s pretty laughable when you live in a state that has competent local government. I feel bad for you guys that are paying blue state taxes and getting a Mississippi level of competence. While I may be able to agree with much of what you say, it cannot be dismissed that the federal response, (i.e., the president's response) was woefully inadequate and indeed damaging. When a large percentage of the country follows your pronouncements, you have a duty to be truthful and accurate. As president, you have a duty to put the welfare of the country and its citizens ahead of your own. This president failed miserably, and to an extent perhaps never before seen in this country. I would also point out that most of the people paying blue states taxes have blue state incomes. Makes it a lot easier to swallow.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 25, 2020 14:55:52 GMT -5
I was just reading an article that reported the 57% of Republicans say it's acceptable. the same article says 33% of Democrats say it's acceptable. I kind of get that. I often think we think our ability to thwart nature is better than it is. It always amazes me when people say the government should have fixed it when a natural disaster hits. Folks some things are out of our control. I have also thought that sometimes we take it too far sustaining life no matter what. I don't think death is the worst thing that can happen to someone. Quality of life counts. I still believe in social distancing and wearing face masks, we don't have to let Covid wipe us out. no.
10% of Democrats find it acceptable.
33% of INDEPENDENTS find it acceptable.
if people think that losing 180k was inevitable, they are dead wrong. it was not inevitable. if we did what South Korea did, we would have lost 2000.
you read that right.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 25, 2020 14:56:56 GMT -5
you know what? a lot of this makes sense. a combination of fatalism, survivalism, and a failure to meet the worst case scenario.
got it.
I guess that is what happens when you never look outside your own country for possible solutions to problems.
this thread is really making me negative on America.
I agree with you. The thing is those things are NOT American ideals. Well, not the ones I was taught (brought up with?). I was brought up with the The Land of Plenty and a way for everyone to build a better life. Cooperation (community), Compassion, Fairness/Justice. All the States working together (that whole United States part) to create a good life for every one. commie!
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,416
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Aug 25, 2020 15:11:11 GMT -5
I agree, but it still doesn't answer the question:
why is 180k dead Americans acceptable?
I HONESTLY don't get it. seriously.
I don’t think it’s acceptable as much is unavoidable. We are an international country, so we didn’t have the option of closing our borders like New Zealand did. And we have these ideas about individual liberty and states rights that make it more difficult to mount a national response. And all the feds could’ve done a lot of things a lot better. So many people have come to expect incompetence from the federal government. In my little red state, we shut down I think before New York did, and the schools immediately started providing sack breakfast and lunch to school kids, handing out chrome books to kids who didn’t have computers at home, and did a pretty damn good job teaching during the lockdown. I was so impressed that I pulled my daughter out of the private school and put her in a public school this year. Local officials immediately started partnering with businesses to make sure testing was free and easy. Everybody I know who’s had a fever or cough was sent for testing, which takes less than an hour, and got the results back in 1 to 2 days. The nursing homes were locked down very early on, which drastically reduce the hospitalizations and deaths. And the health department is being pretty aggressive with contact tracing. This didn’t happen because the feds came in and rescued us . This happened because local government officials were in Covid meetings hammering this out long before the shut down, and probably had loose plans in place for pandemics years ago. And while my state isn’t as poor as Mississippi, we also don’t have hordes of one percenters paying skyhigh taxes like the East and West Coast does. Other than the states that were hit first, the idea that this couldn’t have been handled without a huge federal response it’s pretty laughable when you live in a state that has competent local government. I feel bad for you guys that are paying blue state taxes and getting a Mississippi level of competence. The ridiculous number of dead was completely avoidable. If we took it seriously initially, didn’t make mask a political statement, didn’t open the country up too quickly, and a whole host of other mistakes we made, we could have saved about 1/2 of these people. Remember, there were predictions of 90k dead by 8/4 if we tried to mitigate it. But that would have required leadership at a national level, so we had a coordinated response, instead of a piecemeal approach. That could have saved lives. But continue to believe it was unavoidable. And continue to believe you dodged the bullet. It is heading your way, since it did the northeast, south, and west coast. It is on its way to the heartland and the mountain west. It will do what it wants, unless we learn our lesson
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 25, 2020 15:11:57 GMT -5
I agree, but it still doesn't answer the question:
why is 180k dead Americans acceptable?
I HONESTLY don't get it. seriously.
I don’t think it’s acceptable as much is unavoidable. We are an international country, so we didn’t have the option of closing our borders like New Zealand did. . South Korea is thoroughly international. so is Japan. so is Germany. ALL of these countries did vastly better than us.
it is time to stop making up excuses for our failure and dealing with it.
or is that the REAL reason that 57% of Republicans think it is OK? that we are not up to the task of self criticism AT ALL.
American Exceptionalism doesn't look so great in light of this massive failure.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 25, 2020 15:16:54 GMT -5
I don’t think it’s acceptable as much is unavoidable. We are an international country, so we didn’t have the option of closing our borders like New Zealand did. And we have these ideas about individual liberty and states rights that make it more difficult to mount a national response. And all the feds could’ve done a lot of things a lot better. So many people have come to expect incompetence from the federal government. In my little red state, we shut down I think before New York did, and the schools immediately started providing sack breakfast and lunch to school kids, handing out chrome books to kids who didn’t have computers at home, and did a pretty damn good job teaching during the lockdown. I was so impressed that I pulled my daughter out of the private school and put her in a public school this year. Local officials immediately started partnering with businesses to make sure testing was free and easy. Everybody I know who’s had a fever or cough was sent for testing, which takes less than an hour, and got the results back in 1 to 2 days. The nursing homes were locked down very early on, which drastically reduce the hospitalizations and deaths. And the health department is being pretty aggressive with contact tracing. This didn’t happen because the feds came in and rescued us . This happened because local government officials were in Covid meetings hammering this out long before the shut down, and probably had loose plans in place for pandemics years ago. And while my state isn’t as poor as Mississippi, we also don’t have hordes of one percenters paying skyhigh taxes like the East and West Coast does. Other than the states that were hit first, the idea that this couldn’t have been handled without a huge federal response it’s pretty laughable when you live in a state that has competent local government. I feel bad for you guys that are paying blue state taxes and getting a Mississippi level of competence. The ridiculous number of dead was completely avoidable. If we took it seriously initially, didn’t make mask a political statement, didn’t open the country up too quickly, and a whole host of other mistakes we made, we could have saved about 1/2 of these people. Remember, there were predictions of 90k dead by 8/4 if we tried to mitigate it. But that would have required leadership at a national level, so we had a coordinated response, instead of a piecemeal approach. That could have saved lives. But continue to believe it was unavoidable. And continue to believe you dodged the bullet. It is heading your way, since it did the northeast, south, and west coast. It is on its way to the heartland and the mountain west. It will do what it wants, unless we learn our lesson this is why Trump was so pissed of when Birx said that the virus was now ubiquitous. it means that it is likely to be just as bad in Missoula as it is in LA. and just as bad in Oklahoma as it is in NY.
and that would just ruin his whole plan of letting it ravage my community to improve his electoral chances.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Aug 25, 2020 15:47:01 GMT -5
I would also point out that most of the people paying blue states taxes have blue state incomes. Makes it a lot easier to swallow. In my line of work, moving to a blue state means living in a smaller house In a sketchier neighborhood, with worse schools and a longer commute. The 20 to 50% bump in pay doesn’t really do much for you if you’re paying over three times as much for housing and taxes.
|
|