Covid-19

[YankeePride1967]

Re: Covid-19

I hope you are right (about Trump losing the election and the Senate turning, not about people getting sick) but I fear you are not. I have huge doubts about Biden beating Trump. And if the enthusiasm to vote for Biden isn't there, Dems can forget about the Senate.

It isn’t about the enthusiasm for Joe, it is the enthusiasm for getting Trump out. And 2016 is not a good comparison because now we have seen the harm he has done. He barely, even with the huge advantage the electoral college provided him, won in 16 and has lost support. Unless the Dems do something to mess it up which they are very good at, I don’t see how he wins again

[YFIB]

Re: Covid-19

I hope you are right (about Trump losing the election and the Senate turning, not about people getting sick) but I fear you are not. I have huge doubts about Biden beating Trump. And if the enthusiasm to vote for Biden isn't there, Dems can forget about the Senate.

I worry about the election turnout being compromised by coronavirus and Republican shenanigans (see Wisconsin primary), but thus far its hard to find any signs of an enthusiasm gap. The Democrats in key races largely reported much better fundraising numbers than their opponents, which I think reflects Democrats focus on this Fall. I don't think it's a slam dunk that Biden wins by any means, but I think Democrats will turn out.

[Maynerd]

Re: Covid-19

https://www.drjohnm.org/2020/05/can-...6odzw3gxnujd1c

Good read. One of the premises is that we seem to have changed the generally-accepted purpose of 'flattening the curve.' Originally, the discussion was to slow down the exponential spread of the disease to prevent overwhelming medical facilities. But now, the belief seems to be an effort to save lives. This is an incorrect supposition. Flattening the curve spreads the time period out, but the area under the curve remains the same.

So, someone who is unwilling to return to work becomes an issue. It's obviously their right, but for how long are we to pay unemployment? Two years? Three? Longer? We don't have any semblance of an end date for the infection. Re-opening the economy may or may not be premature, but medical facilities currently have an excess capacity. We cannot conduct a national quarantine until the disease is completely eradicated. So, the return to productivity needs to happen sooner, but with certain planning involved. Refusing to return to productivity because there's a virus out there is unworkable over the time period we're considering.

Basically, the contention is that the total number of fatalities will likely remain near constant until such time as we have an effective vaccine, which could take years.

[Yankee Tripper]

Re: Covid-19

https://travisdoesmath.github.io/covid-viz/


Interesting graphics here for those who like that kind of stuff.

[YankeePride1967]

Re: Covid-19

Sure republicans cause the problem reaching the current level (not blaming them for the virus itself but for severity) and then blame others because they don’t want to die to make them money. Anyone saying open things up now cannot say they are pro life.


Tell me, which of YOUR loved ones are you willing to sacrifice for the cause?

[Maynerd]

Re: Covid-19

Anyone saying open things up now cannot say they are pro life.

Then, what are the criteria for opening things back up? Serious question. Do we wait for a certain decrease to the number of new cases? If so, what do we do when the numbers start to ramp upward again? Do we wait until the disease is eradicated? That could very easily take years.

Tell me, which of YOUR loved ones are you willing to sacrifice for the cause?

See the article I posted above. Re-opening the economy does not sacrifice anyone's loved ones. The only way to completely protect everyone from exposure to the virus is a full and complete quarantine, in which case we'll all starve to death long before the virus gets us.

Social distancing and workplace shutdowns won't save anyone, in the long run, but will push the time frame to the right, preventing an overstress on medical response. Pushing that quarantine so far to the right as to have a vaccine in place is not a reasonable scenario.

[Texsahara]

Re: Covid-19

https://www.drjohnm.org/2020/05/can-...6odzw3gxnujd1c

Good read. One of the premises is that we seem to have changed the generally-accepted purpose of 'flattening the curve.' Originally, the discussion was to slow down the exponential spread of the disease to prevent overwhelming medical facilities. But now, the belief seems to be an effort to save lives. This is an incorrect supposition. Flattening the curve spreads the time period out, but the area under the curve remains the same.

So, someone who is unwilling to return to work becomes an issue. It's obviously their right, but for how long are we to pay unemployment? Two years? Three? Longer? We don't have any semblance of an end date for the infection. Re-opening the economy may or may not be premature, but medical facilities currently have an excess capacity. We cannot conduct a national quarantine until the disease is completely eradicated. So, the return to productivity needs to happen sooner, but with certain planning involved. Refusing to return to productivity because there's a virus out there is unworkable over the time period we're considering.

Basically, the contention is that the total number of fatalities will likely remain near constant until such time as we have an effective vaccine, which could take years.

Thank you. I have been trying to explain this to my minions, both those that are still working and those that are furloughed or have chosen unpaid leaves. Some get it, others look at me like I have three heads. A handout always helps.

[Texsahara]

Re: Covid-19

Then, what are the criteria for opening things back up? Serious question. Do we wait for a certain decrease to the number of new cases? If so, what do we do when the numbers start to ramp upward again? Do we wait until the disease is eradicated? That could very easily take years.


See the article I posted above. Re-opening the economy does not sacrifice anyone's loved ones. The only way to completely protect everyone from exposure to the virus is a full and complete quarantine, in which case we'll all starve to death long before the virus gets us.

Social distancing and workplace shutdowns won't save anyone, in the long run, but will push the time frame to the right, preventing an overstress on medical response. Pushing that quarantine so far to the right as to have a vaccine in place is not a reasonable scenario.

Now I have to disagree! Social distancing, washing your hands, and covering your face are still key to saving lives. The shutdowns were needed to get us to a manageable place and reopening does not have to mean going back to the way things were. Test/trace/isolate. Without mitigation many, many more lives would have been lost. Will still be lost. But we can keep that number down by taking the proper measures.

[YankeePride1967]

Re: Covid-19

I think we need to open the economy and maybe in some parts of the country it is possible. But the assumption has to be people will not do the right tbing because they never do. Which has been proven in the states that have eased restrictions. Think it this had been handled the way it should have, we may all be open to some level now. But if we open we need to have enforcement of the rules and the t has to be done safely. People don’t realize the risk of going back to square one, or even worse, if not done correctly

[Maynerd]

Re: Covid-19

Now I have to disagree! Social distancing, washing your hands, and covering your face are still key to saving lives.

We don't disagree at all. I probably worded it poorly. It happens. I'm by no means advocating a return to the societal norms we enjoyed six months ago. I'm just advocating for opening up the economy with a plan, rather than doing it all at once, or not doing it at all.

Here in Colorado, we're shifting from 'Stay At Home' to 'Safer at Home.' Businesses are re-opening, but with limitations to the number of employees that can be on site, and with face masks. Bars and restaurants are NOT re-opening yet, and when they do, it's pretty clear that they will open at reduced capacity. Colorado also has a system where the individual counties and cities can be MORE restrictive than the Governor's plan. The City of Denver remains in the Stay At Home phase, while most non-urban areas have gone to the Safer At Home guidelines.

Masks? Not assembling as large groups? Using teleconferencing instead of regular business meetings? Obsessive hand-washing? I'm definitely with you on all these.

[Texsahara]

Re: Covid-19

We don't disagree at all. I probably worded it poorly. It happens. I'm by no means advocating a return to the societal norms we enjoyed six months ago. I'm just advocating for opening up the economy with a plan, rather than doing it all at once, or not doing it at all.

Here in Colorado, we're shifting from 'Stay At Home' to 'Safer at Home.' Businesses are re-opening, but with limitations to the number of employees that can be on site, and with face masks. Bars and restaurants are NOT re-opening yet, and when they do, it's pretty clear that they will open at reduced capacity. Colorado also has a system where the individual counties and cities can be MORE restrictive than the Governor's plan. The City of Denver remains in the Stay At Home phase, while most non-urban areas have gone to the Safer At Home guidelines.

Masks? Not assembling as large groups? Using teleconferencing instead of regular business meetings? Obsessive hand-washing? I'm definitely with you on all these.

:chestbump:



(And a big hooray to your guy Hickenlooper for taking the Senate plunge. He's gonna win and win big.)

[yankeeschic12324]

We don't disagree at all. I probably worded it poorly. It happens. I'm by no means advocating a return to the societal norms we enjoyed six months ago. I'm just advocating for opening up the economy with a plan, rather than doing it all at once, or not doing it at all.

Here in Colorado, we're shifting from 'Stay At Home' to 'Safer at Home.' Businesses are re-opening, but with limitations to the number of employees that can be on site, and with face masks. Bars and restaurants are NOT re-opening yet, and when they do, it's pretty clear that they will open at reduced capacity. Colorado also has a system where the individual counties and cities can be MORE restrictive than the Governor's plan. The City of Denver remains in the Stay At Home phase, while most non-urban areas have gone to the Safer At Home guidelines.

Masks? Not assembling as large groups? Using teleconferencing instead of regular business meetings? Obsessive hand-washing? I'm definitely with you on all these.

Arizona is doing this as well. We never had a stay at home/lockdown order. Was definitely more lax (we could walk around at parks, but not play on swings or sit at tables there, for example). This Friday they are opening up more places by appointment only (salons/barbers for instance will be allowed to do this), though bars/restaurants will remain closed for in-house dining.

[Maynerd]

Re: Covid-19

(And a big hooray to your guy Hickenlooper for taking the Senate plunge. He's gonna win and win big.)

I suspect you're right, but I wouldn't put that seat in the bank just yet. Gardner is a popular Senator, and has done more than a few things to the benefit of his constituents. Meanwhile, Hickenlooper is still spending a lot of taxpayer dollars (over a year after leaving office) defending himself against ethics violations. I think those charges are overblown, but there will be repercussions next November.

I have previously voted for Gardner as US Senator. I don't regret that vote. I have previously voted for Hickenlooper as Governor. I didn't regret THAT vote, either. I don't think the voters of Colorado lose, either way. And, I honestly wonder whether people will vote with a consideration toward which party controls the Senate, rather than which candidate will best represent Colorado.

Too early to tell, but I'd guess that Hick wins, but in a close contest, not a runaway.

[Maynerd]

Re: Covid-19

This Friday they are opening up more places by appointment only (salons/barbers for instance will be allowed to do this), though bars/restaurants will remain closed for in-house dining.

Colorado implemented Safer At Home last Friday, which allowed salons/barbershops to open, with sanitization measures in place. I got to my barber's on Saturday. The former military guy in me couldn't stand that I hadn't had a haircut in a month and a half, despite there not being many hairs left on the top of my head.

People noticed at work on Monday, because such businesses are still closed where I work. They're open where I live. "Hey! Where'd you find an open barber?"

[YankeePride1967]

Re: Covid-19

Then, what are the criteria for opening things back up? Serious question. Do we wait for a certain decrease to the number of new cases? If so, what do we do when the numbers start to ramp upward again? Do we wait until the disease is eradicated? That could very easily take years.


See the article I posted above. Re-opening the economy does not sacrifice anyone's loved ones. The only way to completely protect everyone from exposure to the virus is a full and complete quarantine, in which case we'll all starve to death long before the virus gets us.

Social distancing and workplace shutdowns won't save anyone, in the long run, but will push the time frame to the right, preventing an overstress on medical response. Pushing that quarantine so far to the right as to have a vaccine in place is not a reasonable scenario.

Just to clarify I wasn’t posting this in response to you. It was aimed at the Trump crowd that wants to open it up full stop and minimizing the virus.