"Opening up" means risking your life

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I don't care at all if my husband and I catch Covid-19 because the chance that we would experience an illness more severe than the flu is extremely small. And of course reopening things, is going to cause the number of cases to go up. Yes, many more people will become infected, for the vast majority, they will experience a flu like illness. Will deaths increase as well? Of course. Yes, it's a terrible thing, I don't mean to sound heartless but I simply don't think a disease that kills less than 2% of those infected is worth the damage that this will cause. Jeff, I really think the main difference between our perspectives is that I am under the belief that economic damage of a prolonged shutdown will be much greater than you believe. I am not the least bit opposed to extensive government programs to try to mitigate the damage, but I don't think anything we can do will come close to mitigating the damage of a prolonged global shutdown.

I will submit that you likely have no first degree friends who have had this illness or where you have had any sort of day by day account of what this illness is like for those who are impacted by it, but I can assure you, it is not like having a mild or severe flu. It is far, far worse. My friends who are recovering from it (as opposed to the ones who have died) are saying that the peak or the worst they really wanted to just die, it was that bad, and that the recovery is very arduous, some suffering chronic lung issues, others are very lethargic. This is weeks after. So it isn't like a little 3 day flu like thing that you just bounce back from.

Yes, I realize all of this. Avoiding this is not worth causing a global depression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I don't care at all if my husband and I catch Covid-19 because the chance that we would experience an illness more severe than the flu is extremely small. And of course reopening things, is going to cause the number of cases to go up. Yes, many more people will become infected, for the vast majority, they will experience a flu like illness. Will deaths increase as well? Of course. Yes, it's a terrible thing, I don't mean to sound heartless but I simply don't think a disease that kills less than 2% of those infected is worth the damage that this will cause. Jeff, I really think the main difference between our perspectives is that I am under the belief that economic damage of a prolonged shutdown will be much greater than you believe. I am not the least bit opposed to extensive government programs to try to mitigate the damage, but I don't think anything we can do will come close to mitigating the damage of a prolonged global shutdown.

I will submit that you likely have no first degree friends who have had this illness or where you have had any sort of day by day account of what this illness is like for those who are impacted by it, but I can assure you, it is not like having a mild or severe flu. It is far, far worse. My friends who are recovering from it (as opposed to the ones who have died) are saying that the peak or the worst they really wanted to just die, it was that bad, and that the recovery is very arduous, some suffering chronic lung issues, others are very lethargic. This is weeks after. So it isn't like a little 3 day flu like thing that you just bounce back from.

Yes, I realize all of this. Avoiding this is not worth causing a global depression.

You know what will cause a global depression? Complete paralysis of the supply chains because cargo ships, airline crews, farmworkers, and factory workers are suffering rolling uncontrolled infections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I don't care at all if my husband and I catch Covid-19 because the chance that we would experience an illness more severe than the flu is extremely small. And of course reopening things, is going to cause the number of cases to go up. Yes, many more people will become infected, for the vast majority, they will experience a flu like illness. Will deaths increase as well? Of course. Yes, it's a terrible thing, I don't mean to sound heartless but I simply don't think a disease that kills less than 2% of those infected is worth the damage that this will cause. Jeff, I really think the main difference between our perspectives is that I am under the belief that economic damage of a prolonged shutdown will be much greater than you believe. I am not the least bit opposed to extensive government programs to try to mitigate the damage, but I don't think anything we can do will come close to mitigating the damage of a prolonged global shutdown.

I will submit that you likely have no first degree friends who have had this illness or where you have had any sort of day by day account of what this illness is like for those who are impacted by it, but I can assure you, it is not like having a mild or severe flu. It is far, far worse. My friends who are recovering from it (as opposed to the ones who have died) are saying that the peak or the worst they really wanted to just die, it was that bad, and that the recovery is very arduous, some suffering chronic lung issues, others are very lethargic. This is weeks after. So it isn't like a little 3 day flu like thing that you just bounce back from.

Yes, I realize all of this. Avoiding this is not worth causing a global depression.

You know what will cause a global depression? Complete paralysis of the supply chains because cargo ships, airline crews, farmworkers, and factory workers are suffering rolling uncontrolled infections.

And moreover, if you believe this is global, maybe you ought to start railing for Trump to actually cooperate internationally instead of making the US a laughing stock and untrustworthy pariah on the world stage.

[Anonymous]

Understand for the 'reopen' crowd, what that means for closed spaces like schools, offices, warehouses etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous 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 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.



But we can reopen now, if we are willing to accept more fatalities. It's not unreasonable to think the % of fatalities from Coronavirus doesn't warrant the economic damage. Obviously not everyone agrees, but again it's not unreasonable to think that the cure that you are proposing is worse than the disease.

Okay, we can open up and accept fatalities. More specifics to the plan need to be discussed however before we do it. One is that given 15% of people end up at the hospital and overwhelm hospitals, would we just forgo the hospital part so that the hospitals could also get back to normal doing surgeries that are backed up, etc. because they have stopped doing many things in order to deal with COVID-19? Could we just allow people to die at home from COVID-19 and not tax the EMTs (who are also put at incredible risk)? If this increased the risk of death from COVID from 2% to say 5-10%, would that be acceptable? At what point in your calculus do the deaths become more important than the economy? Those are important parts of the plan that need to be nailed down.

Also, if teachers get COVID-19 (even if kids do not), at what point does a school shut down if a case is positive? Do we wait for 10% of the staff to be infected? What will the substitute teacher situation be like? Will they come in to cover for the sick or quarantined teachers? What about the administrative staff? Schools are extremely dynamic places with people in and out all day. I really doubt that they will stay open long once this happens. Will we reopen and then end up shutting down again (causing even more illness to spread)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I don't care at all if my husband and I catch Covid-19 because the chance that we would experience an illness more severe than the flu is extremely small. And of course reopening things, is going to cause the number of cases to go up. Yes, many more people will become infected, for the vast majority, they will experience a flu like illness. Will deaths increase as well? Of course. Yes, it's a terrible thing, I don't mean to sound heartless but I simply don't think a disease that kills less than 2% of those infected is worth the damage that this will cause. Jeff, I really think the main difference between our perspectives is that I am under the belief that economic damage of a prolonged shutdown will be much greater than you believe. I am not the least bit opposed to extensive government programs to try to mitigate the damage, but I don't think anything we can do will come close to mitigating the damage of a prolonged global shutdown.

I will submit that you likely have no first degree friends who have had this illness or where you have had any sort of day by day account of what this illness is like for those who are impacted by it, but I can assure you, it is not like having a mild or severe flu. It is far, far worse. My friends who are recovering from it (as opposed to the ones who have died) are saying that the peak or the worst they really wanted to just die, it was that bad, and that the recovery is very arduous, some suffering chronic lung issues, others are very lethargic. This is weeks after. So it isn't like a little 3 day flu like thing that you just bounce back from.

Yes, I realize all of this. Avoiding this is not worth causing a global depression.

We are getting the depression either way. Do you want it with excessive death, or without. That is basically the choice at this point.

[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.

OMG! The risk of a driving is nowhere near 1%!!! Not for a given driving trip and not even over a lifetime. And, we spend a ton of research money, as do automakers, to make driving safer. This includes safety features in cars, laws governing driving behavior, police officers to enforce those laws, and regulatory agencies to ensure automakers are compliant.

If you are even trying to make this comparison, then you absolutely have no understanding how to contextualize a 1% fatality rate for a disease we know almost nothing about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous 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.

+1. Even Charles Munger is baffled by this economy and he has seen many different depressions and recessions in his 96 years.

NOBODY is dismissive of the economic damage. I want you to answer, however, why you are not addressing the things that need to be done to avoid the economic damage. Because it is right in front of our faces that some countries far, far, outpace the US in addressing this. Let's talk about why the US failed, and why Korea and Taiwan did not. It's not because either country viewed the virus as any less dangerous. The dismissive ones are the ones who are pretending like this is a battle between the people who want to "reopen" and the "doctors who don't care about the economy."

I have addressed what needs to be done to avoid the economic damage. We need to reopen asap and accept the fact that there will be more fatalities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous 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.

+1. Even Charles Munger is baffled by this economy and he has seen many different depressions and recessions in his 96 years.

NOBODY is dismissive of the economic damage. I want you to answer, however, why you are not addressing the things that need to be done to avoid the economic damage. Because it is right in front of our faces that some countries far, far, outpace the US in addressing this. Let's talk about why the US failed, and why Korea and Taiwan did not. It's not because either country viewed the virus as any less dangerous. The dismissive ones are the ones who are pretending like this is a battle between the people who want to "reopen" and the "doctors who don't care about the economy."

I have addressed what needs to be done to avoid the economic damage. We need to reopen asap and accept the fact that there will be more fatalities.

This guy is not for real. Stop feeding him.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff's logic doesnt make sense. On one hand he doesnt want death, yet in another thread he was talking about a walk in Rock Creek Park the other day. Another hypocritical statement with political overtures I'm guessing

Yes, I walked in Rock Creek Park because daily exercise is necessary to maintain good health. I stayed more than six feet from anyone else. When I saw that the park became crowded, I began wearing a mask during walks, while still maintaining a safe distance from others. Then, I hurt my foot and haven't been able to walk for a few days.

If we could reopen the economy while allowing everyone to maintain similar conditions as I do on my walks, I would strongly support reopening. But, in fact, we can't so I don't. That is consistency rather than hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is demanding that the working class risk its health while you continue to protect yours.

That's exactly the guidance from the task force, yet I'm sure you don't watch the presser or read the literature because you despise the leader. I'm out every day and see many others doing the same.

I watch the press conference every day. Yesterday I saw Trump supporting protesters who violated every guideline. So I don’t have confidence in his leadership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worry about the risks of opening too soon and certainly opening without widespread testing available and in play.

At the same time, I’m really worried about the impact of prolonged quarantine on communities already struggling. There’s a public health effect of the financial devastation. And I worry that it may tip the scales for people to either reopen prematurely and/or favor Trump and his “return to work” message - hurting the people who are most vulnerable all around (economically and health wise).

This article from WaPo does a good job describing challenges that many of us in the DC area don’t experience bc we are buffered by federal employment and affluence (though I know working and middle class families are certainly suffering in this area too).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/first-the-coronavirus-pandemic-took-their-jobs-then-it-wiped-out-their-health-insurance/2020/04/18/1c2cb5bc-7d7c-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html

There is an even more devastating effect when all of the front line workers, all of the grocery store clerks, all of the food processer workers, all of the truck drivers etc are sick or dead. It is really easy for the average DCUM right winger to site in their living room asking others to take on daily risk because they are out of their job temporarily.

Yep. If those idiot protesters were also protesting to protect front-line workers, then I'd have some respect.

Likely many of the protesters are front line workers since you placed them in the “idiot” category, DCUM elite speak at its finest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

OMG! The risk of a driving is nowhere near 1%!!! Not for a given driving trip and not even over a lifetime. And, we spend a ton of research money, as do automakers, to make driving safer. This includes safety features in cars, laws governing driving behavior, police officers to enforce those laws, and regulatory agencies to ensure automakers are compliant.

If you are even trying to make this comparison, then you absolutely have no understanding how to contextualize a 1% fatality rate for a disease we know almost nothing about.

Which is precisely why I said "for arguments sake" The point I was making is that we should be looking at the total % of a population that is impacted not simply the total numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
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?

Like anti-vaxxers, many of those people are benefiting from reduced risk thanks to those of us who are social distancing.

Personally, I think this is a travesty. The extreme and prolonged stay-at-home measures we are living with are a direct result of a bungled response and lack of federal leadership. Why don't we have enough tests? Why are individual cities around the US having to figure out how to set up testing sites by themselves without guidance and support from the federal government? Why are volunteer networks across the country cropping up to get doctors and nurses masks? Why, in April, is the President just starting to meet with people from the restaurant and food industries to figure out a plan for reopening that maximizes protection to the workers in those industries who are higher risk of exposure?

A pandemic was going to be difficult no matter what...but we are much, much worse off because we spent so much time debating whether the virus was actually a problem and now whether the measures we've put in place are working, when data tells us they are, instead of figuring out solutions to minimize the impacts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous 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.

+1. Even Charles Munger is baffled by this economy and he has seen many different depressions and recessions in his 96 years.

NOBODY is dismissive of the economic damage. I want you to answer, however, why you are not addressing the things that need to be done to avoid the economic damage. Because it is right in front of our faces that some countries far, far, outpace the US in addressing this. Let's talk about why the US failed, and why Korea and Taiwan did not. It's not because either country viewed the virus as any less dangerous. The dismissive ones are the ones who are pretending like this is a battle between the people who want to "reopen" and the "doctors who don't care about the economy."

I have addressed what needs to be done to avoid the economic damage. We need to reopen asap and accept the fact that there will be more fatalities.

Or, we could re-open with testing and the equipment necessary to protect the front line workers in many sectors of our society. Get the federal government to get on manufacturing the swabs (glorified q-tips) that we are lacking to get the tests moving. Your ire needs to be directed at Trump, who has totally dropped the ball, not at the governors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous 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.

+1. Even Charles Munger is baffled by this economy and he has seen many different depressions and recessions in his 96 years.

NOBODY is dismissive of the economic damage. I want you to answer, however, why you are not addressing the things that need to be done to avoid the economic damage. Because it is right in front of our faces that some countries far, far, outpace the US in addressing this. Let's talk about why the US failed, and why Korea and Taiwan did not. It's not because either country viewed the virus as any less dangerous. The dismissive ones are the ones who are pretending like this is a battle between the people who want to "reopen" and the "doctors who don't care about the economy."

I have addressed what needs to be done to avoid the economic damage. We need to reopen asap and accept the fact that there will be more fatalities.

This guy is not for real. Stop feeding him.

Her thank you very much.