"Opening up" means risking your life

jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And if that takes another six months?


If it takes another six months then I suggest that you vote for Biden due to Trump's inability to manage the epidemic better because it should not take another six months.

I don't know what you want me to say. I think I have explained this very clearly. I do not think we can safely reopen the economy now. I think the loudest voices to reopen are not the ones who will be taking the risks and that they are putting their financial interests ahead of the health of others. I am arguing that the health risks of reopening be decreased to the point that those calling for reopening are comfortable accepting that risk for themselves and their families. I don't think that is an unreasonable position or one that is hard to understand.



Jeff, you have an unreasonable expectation of when we can reopen. According to you you want near universal testing before opening Germany South Korea Sweden aren't doing this. Not only that the testing would have to occur multiple times a week according to you.

I'm done trying to talk sense into you for the last time social distancing with masks is the way to go. Otherwise like I said, your scenario might happen in 2021. Keeping everyone home for the next 6 months is ridiculous.


All you need to say is, "I am prepared to risk my health and the health of my family members by exposing ourselves in current conditions". But, you don't appear to be willing to say that. Rather, you seem to be prepared to protect yourself, your family, and your finances while others take the risk.



Everyone does this when they go to the grocery store already. I went to the grocery store on Friday. I wear a mask and social distance. No problem. This fear is completely ridiculous and unnecessary.



What are your working conditions? If we reopen the economy are you going to be exposed to people or will you continue teleworking and social distancing while others take the risk? There is a big difference between a quick trip to the grocery store and all day, every day, exposure to the public.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think that there must be someone in the Trump administration who believes that summer weather will mitigate the contagiousness of the virus. The science on that is mixed, at best, with more scientists seeming to think it will not make a material difference. In any event, absent a vaccine (and there won't be one for 12-18 months), the virus would come roaring back in or around September. But I honestly don't know what to do about a collapsing economy that seems to have little more going for it now than sales of food, toilet paper, and curbside delivery. The elites ("ruling" class) will always do whatever it takes to remain on top of the socioeconomic pyramid as they see it.


You are making a HUGE assumption that a vaccine will be developed that will be effective at protecting people from infection with covid19.

That's an enormous assumption because some diseases can't be prevented by vaccination. In 40 years, no effective vaccine against HIV has been developed. Yes, there are treatments that keep HIV infection at bay, but there's no vaccine and no cure.

There may never be an effective vaccine against covid19, so you can't count on a vaccine to end this pandemic. And you definitely can't count on a vaccine in the next year or so. Contact tracing, isolation and social distancing are all we have right now to fight this pandemic. Oh, and testing, testing, testing.


It’s not an enormous assumption given the general confidence of actual scientists, as opposed to the worry from posters who don’t actually know anything except the fear that is consuming them or their political agenda. Testing, testing, testing is not a plan—it’s a cliched slogan at this point. Widespread testing is key, but it must be combined with quarantining and contact tracing.



Exactly. Testing in and of itself is useless.


Not really. Testing allows us to know what areas are "clean" and what areas are infected. It allows us to know who already has antibodies and who is an asymptomatic carrier. That is not useless information. It is information that can help maintain safety and also "open up parts of the economy."
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And if that takes another six months?


If it takes another six months then I suggest that you vote for Biden due to Trump's inability to manage the epidemic better because it should not take another six months.

I don't know what you want me to say. I think I have explained this very clearly. I do not think we can safely reopen the economy now. I think the loudest voices to reopen are not the ones who will be taking the risks and that they are putting their financial interests ahead of the health of others. I am arguing that the health risks of reopening be decreased to the point that those calling for reopening are comfortable accepting that risk for themselves and their families. I don't think that is an unreasonable position or one that is hard to understand.



Jeff, you have an unreasonable expectation of when we can reopen. According to you you want near universal testing before opening Germany South Korea Sweden aren't doing this. Not only that the testing would have to occur multiple times a week according to you.

I'm done trying to talk sense into you for the last time social distancing with masks is the way to go. Otherwise like I said, your scenario might happen in 2021. Keeping everyone home for the next 6 months is ridiculous.


All you need to say is, "I am prepared to risk my health and the health of my family members by exposing ourselves in current conditions". But, you don't appear to be willing to say that. Rather, you seem to be prepared to protect yourself, your family, and your finances while others take the risk.




I am willing to say it. With all the complaints about people who aren't social distancing, isn't it quite obvious that many of us are prepared to do just that? I honestly don't see why you think that those of us who want things opened are too scared to go out in these current conditions.


Great. Go ahead and lead the way. I am glad to have you as a volunteer test subject.
Anonymous
We lack willpower. We obviously have gone soft. The people of the Great Depression would smack us silly if they saw us whining about this.
Anonymous
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I seriously can’t believe that you think being considered about almost certain economic collapse, is simply being worried about someone’s stock portfolio. You’re usually fairly reasonable. This is a shockingly simplistic way of disregarding people’s concerns over the economic damage this is causing to the entire world.


There are solutions to those economic problems that don't involve a rush to open in unsafe conditions. But, if you believe that your personal economic situation justifies risking your own health and the health of your family members, please go first. As I have repeatedly said, don't expect others to take risks that you won't take.



Jeff, generally you seem to be an educated and well informed person. I can't believe you are minimizing the economic damage this is causing to thinking that people who are concerned are only worried about their own economic situations. I would have to assume that you have enough understanding of economics to realize how intertwined sectors are that a shutdown of this magnitude (not just in the U.S. but globally) is going to have devastating effects on everyone. And what solutions can possibly come close to solving the vast global economic damage that would be caused? This is completely unprecedented. Never before has anything on this scale ever happened. I find it amazing of how dismissive people are of the damage this shut down is going to cause.


I am not dismissive. The virus is here regardless of how much you wish it wasn't. We can have economic damage while minimizing death and illness or we can have economic damage with increased death and illness after reopening prematurely. Either way, we are not going to escape economic damage. Opening up because of the economic damage is not going to make the virus go away. I have repeatedly described what I believe needs to be in place before we can safely open. Those things are not even close to being in place now.

Are you prepared to risk your health and the health of your family members in present conditions? If so, I am happy to have you as a guinea pig to test just how safe opening is now. Otherwise, don't expect others to take the risks that you won't.



Isn't it apparent by the number of people who aren't social distancing, that many don't see going out under these current conditions as nearly as scary as you do?
Anonymous

I think the words "open up" are very subjective. It's all about what those words mean, right? The "open up" can definitely happen, but it needs to be gradual and with the use of testing for those with high public contact (retail and restaurants). People seem to want retail to open and that needs to be monitored. I think we can all agree that crowded bars and big events where people mingle will not be reopening soon. There is some middle ground here. The schools are definitely a problem because those are crowded places. There may be some innovative way to bring students to school on a rotating schedule in order to keep the school less crowded at any given time, but many school events would not be allowed even in such a scenario. Plenty of older teachers would be reticent about working with students because it's really hard to socially distance when trying to help students. Just my two cents.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

But it's still a very small percentage. Yes, as the population continues to grow at such exponential rates, small percentages of fatalities are going to result in higher actual numbers. Take driving for example, I don't know what the % of fatalities are but for arguments sake, let's just say 1% of all total drivers. Does that mean that driving should not be allowed in place like LA as opposed to Des Moines, because 1% of drivers is in LA is a larger number than in Des Moines? And please don't anyone come here and lecture me about how I shouldn't be comparing driving to Coronavirus because it's not contagious. My point is about percentages and numbers.


Driving isn't a virus that spreads without people's knowledge. It is an action that has an ascribed risk to it. I hate that people keep trying to compare this to driving or swimming or the flu. It just isn't and it has been explained a million times.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think that there must be someone in the Trump administration who believes that summer weather will mitigate the contagiousness of the virus. The science on that is mixed, at best, with more scientists seeming to think it will not make a material difference. In any event, absent a vaccine (and there won't be one for 12-18 months), the virus would come roaring back in or around September. But I honestly don't know what to do about a collapsing economy that seems to have little more going for it now than sales of food, toilet paper, and curbside delivery. The elites ("ruling" class) will always do whatever it takes to remain on top of the socioeconomic pyramid as they see it.


You are making a HUGE assumption that a vaccine will be developed that will be effective at protecting people from infection with covid19.

That's an enormous assumption because some diseases can't be prevented by vaccination. In 40 years, no effective vaccine against HIV has been developed. Yes, there are treatments that keep HIV infection at bay, but there's no vaccine and no cure.

There may never be an effective vaccine against covid19, so you can't count on a vaccine to end this pandemic. And you definitely can't count on a vaccine in the next year or so. Contact tracing, isolation and social distancing are all we have right now to fight this pandemic. Oh, and testing, testing, testing.


It’s not an enormous assumption given the general confidence of actual scientists, as opposed to the worry from posters who don’t actually know anything except the fear that is consuming them or their political agenda. Testing, testing, testing is not a plan—it’s a cliched slogan at this point. Widespread testing is key, but it must be combined with quarantining and contact tracing.



Exactly. Testing in and of itself is useless.


Not really. Testing allows us to know what areas are "clean" and what areas are infected. It allows us to know who already has antibodies and who is an asymptomatic carrier. That is not useless information. It is information that can help maintain safety and also "open up parts of the economy."


So, are you suggesting that the government mandate testing for everyone? And, once that testing is done, that only those with antibodies be allowed to work?
And, there is no hard evidence that antibodies provide protection for this virus.
Anonymous
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Open up, and just keep social distancing and wearing a mask. Done.

It is unrealistic to shut down everything for 18 months. That vaccine Billy Boy is funding might be worse than the virus itself because it won’t have time to be tested.

But people have to get back to work. The backlash of shutting down the country will lead to deaths due to food supplies and shortages, transportation, people who have health issues will die and people with mental issues will end up killing themselves.

You can’t lock someone in their house with a business that they are using that to survive away from them. This will lead to devastating economic impacts and lead to more deaths. But this is a virus, not a death sentence. Anytime you step out your house, it’s a risk. We can’t live our lives in fear.


If you open up without proper testing, you are guaranteed to have a resurgence of disease. If you are comfortable getting infected, don't let me stop you. Feel free infect yourself and your family. Just don't expect others to take that risk on your behalf.



The risk is minuscule. The fatality rate is less than 2%! And judging by recent reports that are many more asymptomatic cases than previously thought, the fatality rate would be even lower.



Great. Feel free to end social distancing for yourself and your family. Lead the way.




Well, that's exactly what many people are trying to do.


Yes, but are you personally? Or are you letting others take the risk for you?
[
/quote]


??? Well there's no where to go. But if everything opened up tomorrow I wouldn't bat an eye about taking my kids to Busch Gardens. I don't understand why you think those of us who think things need to be reopened would find it too scary to go out. If we did we would not be in favor of reopening so soon.
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I seriously can’t believe that you think being considered about almost certain economic collapse, is simply being worried about someone’s stock portfolio. You’re usually fairly reasonable. This is a shockingly simplistic way of disregarding people’s concerns over the economic damage this is causing to the entire world.


There are solutions to those economic problems that don't involve a rush to open in unsafe conditions. But, if you believe that your personal economic situation justifies risking your own health and the health of your family members, please go first. As I have repeatedly said, don't expect others to take risks that you won't take.



Jeff, generally you seem to be an educated and well informed person. I can't believe you are minimizing the economic damage this is causing to thinking that people who are concerned are only worried about their own economic situations. I would have to assume that you have enough understanding of economics to realize how intertwined sectors are that a shutdown of this magnitude (not just in the U.S. but globally) is going to have devastating effects on everyone. And what solutions can possibly come close to solving the vast global economic damage that would be caused? This is completely unprecedented. Never before has anything on this scale ever happened. I find it amazing of how dismissive people are of the damage this shut down is going to cause.


I am not dismissive. The virus is here regardless of how much you wish it wasn't. We can have economic damage while minimizing death and illness or we can have economic damage with increased death and illness after reopening prematurely. Either way, we are not going to escape economic damage. Opening up because of the economic damage is not going to make the virus go away. I have repeatedly described what I believe needs to be in place before we can safely open. Those things are not even close to being in place now.

Are you prepared to risk your health and the health of your family members in present conditions? If so, I am happy to have you as a guinea pig to test just how safe opening is now. Otherwise, don't expect others to take the risks that you won't.



Isn't it apparent by the number of people who aren't social distancing, that many don't see going out under these current conditions as nearly as scary as you do?


I am not sure why you think this point is so clever that you needed to post it twice, but don't you think the number of virus-truthers who have since died of the disease is an indication that some people are not as smart as they thought?

As I replied to your previous post, lead the way. I am glad that you are volunteering to be a guinea pig.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
I think the words "open up" are very subjective. It's all about what those words mean, right? The "open up" can definitely happen, but it needs to be gradual and with the use of testing for those with high public contact (retail and restaurants). People seem to want retail to open and that needs to be monitored. I think we can all agree that crowded bars and big events where people mingle will not be reopening soon. There is some middle ground here. The schools are definitely a problem because those are crowded places. There may be some innovative way to bring students to school on a rotating schedule in order to keep the school less crowded at any given time, but many school events would not be allowed even in such a scenario. Plenty of older teachers would be reticent about working with students because it's really hard to socially distance when trying to help students. Just my two cents.


Problem is you've got some folks who'll just go to Busch Gardens because it's all overblown. Not a thoughtful consideration of how to re-open different types of businesses, a discussion of the flaws and benefits of a Swedish-style slowdown, a mention of how to get PPE for people and how to protect high risk people who are still in the workforce ... nope, just open it all up, it's a liberal hoax, I'll take my kids to Busch Gardens.
Anonymous
All those who think the virus is no big deal, it is now the leading cause of death in the US.

The virus has killed more than 1,800 Americans almost every day since April 7, and the official toll may be an undercount. By comparison, heart disease typically kills 1,774 Americans a day, and cancer kills 1,641.


Anonymous
Also - for proponents of opening up beyond even what Sweden is doing - what would make you think we might have to shut it all down again? 100,000 deaths? An outbreak in your community? Someone you know getting sick?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:And if that takes another six months?


If it takes another six months then I suggest that you vote for Biden due to Trump's inability to manage the epidemic better because it should not take another six months.

I don't know what you want me to say. I think I have explained this very clearly. I do not think we can safely reopen the economy now. I think the loudest voices to reopen are not the ones who will be taking the risks and that they are putting their financial interests ahead of the health of others. I am arguing that the health risks of reopening be decreased to the point that those calling for reopening are comfortable accepting that risk for themselves and their families. I don't think that is an unreasonable position or one that is hard to understand.



Jeff, you have an unreasonable expectation of when we can reopen. According to you you want near universal testing before opening Germany South Korea Sweden aren't doing this. Not only that the testing would have to occur multiple times a week according to you.

I'm done trying to talk sense into you for the last time social distancing with masks is the way to go. Otherwise like I said, your scenario might happen in 2021. Keeping everyone home for the next 6 months is ridiculous.


I am not Jeff obviously, but I would respond that if we had per capita testing at the same level as SK or Germany, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I have been banging the drum on testing. There absolutely no reason we should have as pervasive a program as other western countries. We don't because our program was delayed because of a variety of factors including incompetence and lack of leadership.

We could take the WHO tests NOW and augment what we are doing...but what we have now is an abomination that lacks any justifiable excuses. If you are a "re-open" person, then you should be upset at Trump for his lack of execution. If you are a 'wait it out" person, you should be upset at Trump for his lack of execution. Getting mad at governoers who are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing is a waste of time and divisive.

Did Obama neglect NJ after Sandy because Chris Christie is a republican? No...so why is that happening now?
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Anonymous wrote:
??? Well there's no where to go. But if everything opened up tomorrow I wouldn't bat an eye about taking my kids to Busch Gardens. I don't understand why you think those of us who think things need to be reopened would find it too scary to go out. If we did we would not be in favor of reopening so soon.


If you would go to Busch Gardens tomorrow, you have a completely different understanding of the dangers of the virus than I do. Are you completely unaware of the spread of COVID-19 resulting from spring break, various church services, funerals, and so on? But, good luck to you.
post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: