"Opening up" means risking your life

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Oh but they were all at-risk and so that doesn't count.

/s

[Anonymous]

All I have to say is that Trump and the R establishment are LOVING that this has turned into a simple-minded fight about "the libs need to open up now!" ... taking the focus off of the federal failures to do anything to actually allow us to open up safely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what doesn't make sense......

Grocery stores are open, as they should be. Most grocery stores have narrow aisles. Keeping 6 feet from everyone is tough to do. But, we make it work by wearing masks and being careful not to touch our faces.

Yet, stories like Hobby Lobby must remain shut because they are deemed "non essential." The Hobby Lobby in my area is huge. The aisles are large. It doesn't get nearly as crowded as hardware stores or grocery stores in the area.

In many businesses, it is much easier to maintain social distancing than in businesses that are allowed to remain open.

This is just lunacy.

It is simple math. Coronavirus will spread to a certain number of people during grocery store visits -- masks and social distancing only goe so far and are not a perfect defense. So, grocery shopping will result in X number of illnesses, but because we have to eat, we take that risk. If shopping at Hobby Lobby also resulted in X illnesses, we would have 2X instead of X illnesses. Multiply the by however more businesses think they should reopen.

Also, I don't think the Hobby Lobby case is helped by the founder initially choosing to stay open because God had talked to his wife and told them they would be protected. Then the company defied orders to close in several states.

Jeff, what you have said here mirrors the exact thinking of people such as myself who feel that we have gone too far with this shut down. That because we have to eat, we have to accept X number of illnesses (meaning deaths), and need to take that risk. I think the main difference between your thinking and mine is that you don't think the overall economic devastation from shutting down will be as great as what I think it will be.

No, the difference is the utility value of a life of X number of lives versus the economic impact. The problem is, the economy is impacted either way. To your way of thinking, it is worth 2X lives to for the same negative economic impact. For example, looking at South Dakota...what happens if 50 food processing plants are taken offline because of outbreaks? or 500? At some point, if it isn't contained, the economic impact will be beyond catastrophic. Right now, it is bad but manageable. Once supply chains are impacted, then we are totally screwed.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

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.

Has FL Spring Break been traced to any localized outbreaks? FL rates remain well below the national average, and there is absolutely zero evidence it's hiding a NY-sized catastrophe (even if you think, as I do, adding in the nursing homes might increase death rates by 50-100%.)

Mardi Gras almost certainly seems to have been the cause of LA's outbreak, but why FL didn't spike up a la LA (maybe it's b/c Spring Break is more of a daytime thing and the UV rays zapped the virus?) is an question the pro-shutdown folks have to answer. Likewise, the pro-open folks have to answer how they'd handle 20 Smithfield food outbreaks.

[Anonymous]

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 I have not responded to this assertion because I don't think it matters, I would hope that most of us would be able to put aside how the shutdown personally affects us with how it affects society at large. But since you seem to think that those of us who are in favor of reopening would not be taking "risks" and putting their financial interests first I will respond. I am a teacher (check all my previous posts if you don't believe me) and my husband is a fed. My personal financial situation isn't at all being impacted by this (yet - eventually we will all be affected) And yes, if things reopened I would have to return to work, which in your mind would be risking my health. On a personal level, I am loving the shutdown. My husband likes working from home, and to be completely honest I am in no hurry to head back to school. Yet I am very much in favor of things reopening asap, because I don't want to see society destroyed simply so my husband and I can keep working from home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t need a forcible quarantine. I would appreciate a text message that I’ve been exposed, with a link to an attachment for an order for testing.
That truly means we have to have tests far and wide.

Poster you are responding to here. So would I. I am not an anti-big government conservative, that so many people think one must be if they favor reopening society asap. But my point is, in our country it would be considered an invasion of our civil liberties and we just can't do it. Personally, I wish that a short term emergency exception could be made, but I think that's highly unlikely to happen.

I would be willing to accept this as well. I think most of the right wingers would reject it and would say that once "the man" has the info, they aren't ever letting go. The problem is, they already have it. In fact, one of the first moves made by the Trump Administration was to sign a contract with Cambridge Analytica for domestic consulting. So ya, they can already do this and likely are but in other verticals.

[Anonymous]

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?

It isn't a matter of scary. it is a matter of respect for our fellow humans. Further, none of us know who is an asymptomatic carrier. I would be devastated if I found out in hindsight that I was responsible for the death of one of my parents or other loved ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

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.

Has FL Spring Break been traced to any localized outbreaks? FL rates remain well below the national average, and there is absolutely zero evidence it's hiding a NY-sized catastrophe (even if you think, as I do, adding in the nursing homes might increase death rates by 50-100%.)

Mardi Gras almost certainly seems to have been the cause of LA's outbreak, but why FL didn't spike up a la LA (maybe it's b/c Spring Break is more of a daytime thing and the UV rays zapped the virus?) is an question the pro-shutdown folks have to answer. Likewise, the pro-open folks have to answer how they'd handle 20 Smithfield food outbreaks.

It's cute that you think the "pro-open" folks have anything approaching an evidentiary basis to answer the question. On the one side, we have people trying in good faith to answer a very difficult question in an emergency. On the other side, you have people who just want to p)wn the libs.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Has FL Spring Break been traced to any localized outbreaks? FL rates remain well below the national average, and there is absolutely zero evidence it's hiding a NY-sized catastrophe (even if you think, as I do, adding in the nursing homes might increase death rates by 50-100%.)

Yes, Florida's Spring Break spread coronavirus all over:

But, not just Florida's:

"44 Texas Students Have Coronavirus After Spring Break Trip"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/us/coronavirus-texas-austin-spring-break-cabo.html

[Anonymous]

Where has Jeff said we need universal testing?

[jsteele]

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 I have not responded to this assertion because I don't think it matters, I would hope that most of us would be able to put aside how the shutdown personally affects us with how it affects society at large. But since you seem to think that those of us who are in favor of reopening would not be taking "risks" and putting their financial interests first I will respond. I am a teacher (check all my previous posts if you don't believe me) and my husband is a fed. My personal financial situation isn't at all being impacted by this (yet - eventually we will all be affected) And yes, if things reopened I would have to return to work, which in your mind would be risking my health. On a personal level, I am loving the shutdown. My husband likes working from home, and to be completely honest I am in no hurry to head back to school. Yet I am very much in favor of things reopening asap, because I don't want to see society destroyed simply so my husband and I can keep working from home.

How would you feel if after returning to work you find that both you and your husband have caught COVID-19, your school has to close again because of an outbreak, and while your husband's job could still be done remotely, he is too ill to work. So, then you are even in a worse situation and the economy is still not recovering?

It's good that you are willing to personally accept this risk, but I hope you won't have to make such a sacrifice.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

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.

Jeff, I'm not sure why you keep saying this. Isn't it obvious that many of us disagree with your assessment of how dangerous this virus is?

[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 I have not responded to this assertion because I don't think it matters, I would hope that most of us would be able to put aside how the shutdown personally affects us with how it affects society at large. But since you seem to think that those of us who are in favor of reopening would not be taking "risks" and putting their financial interests first I will respond. I am a teacher (check all my previous posts if you don't believe me) and my husband is a fed. My personal financial situation isn't at all being impacted by this (yet - eventually we will all be affected) And yes, if things reopened I would have to return to work, which in your mind would be risking my health. On a personal level, I am loving the shutdown. My husband likes working from home, and to be completely honest I am in no hurry to head back to school. Yet I am very much in favor of things reopening asap, because I don't want to see society destroyed simply so my husband and I can keep working from home.

Lady we are ALL worried about the economy. Why don't you save your concern for asking about why we don't have PPE for our essential workers? Why we have no coherent plan to test, trace, and isolate? Those are the things we would need to re-open safely. It's not a mystery, and yet there is NO PLAN.

[Anonymous]

Test everyone. Activate FEMA and Nat Guard and USPS and volunteer workers to deliver food to those in need at home. Get all negative testers back to work and all positive testers stay at home/hospital till clear. Do it. Now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

It isn't a matter of scary. it is a matter of respect for our fellow humans. Further, none of us know who is an asymptomatic carrier. I would be devastated if I found out in hindsight that I was responsible for the death of one of my parents or other loved ones.

Both you and your parents should be taking maximum protective measures so you aren't sharing germs.