"Opening up" means risking your life

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that some actual members of the working class might reasonably want reopenings for reasons that have little or nothing to do with GOP CEOs’ stock holdings.

You should find an actual member of the working class and ask them. I guarantee that you are not one.

DP. You are right- I am a government employee and am grateful that I am not likely to lose my job. But I have plenty of family members who are working class, some are still working in essential positions. My 66yo dad has no business being out there working with his smoking history but he fears losing his paycheck more than the virus. So he continues to work.

The tone deafness in this board is astounding to me sometimes. Be the liberal you profess to be and put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

Exactly what do you think should be done?

DP. Maybe just try to think a little harder about a response other than "you first" and stock market gains.

+1. It’s incredibly rude and out of touch.

It’s a bumper sticker, not an argument.

So, none of you guys have any idea what should be done but you definitely want someone else to go first. Have I got that right?

DP but masks and social distancing should be in place except for the actual current hot spots. Most people should be working again

[Anonymous]

this aged well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that some actual members of the working class might reasonably want reopenings for reasons that have little or nothing to do with GOP CEOs’ stock holdings.

You should find an actual member of the working class and ask them. I guarantee that you are not one.

DP. You are right- I am a government employee and am grateful that I am not likely to lose my job. But I have plenty of family members who are working class, some are still working in essential positions. My 66yo dad has no business being out there working with his smoking history but he fears losing his paycheck more than the virus. So he continues to work.

The tone deafness in this board is astounding to me sometimes. Be the liberal you profess to be and put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

Exactly what do you think should be done?

DP. Maybe just try to think a little harder about a response other than "you first" and stock market gains.

+1. It’s incredibly rude and out of touch.

It’s a bumper sticker, not an argument.

So, none of you guys have any idea what should be done but you definitely want someone else to go first. Have I got that right?

DP but masks and social distancing should be in place except for the actual current hot spots. Most people should be working again

DP. The problem is that the response has been all over the place. Some states, like MD where I live, have put forward a reasonable plan. When the criteria are met and I’m asked to go back to work and return the kids to school/daycare, I will go. I accept a certain level of risk- the point of the social distancing measures is largely to slow things down, not bubble wrap everyone until there is a vaccine. I know there is a good chance we will be exposed or get it at some point.

But then you have states like GA with idiot governors flying by the seat of their pants.

[Anonymous]

The crazy Mayor of Las Vegas, Carolyn Goodman, offering up the lives of her city's residents for a coronavirus "control group", was the wife of a mafia lawyer whose clients included Meyer Lansky.

The Mob. Just remember. It is always the mob with this bunch. KellyAnne's family. McGahn's family. The Trump family...all mob.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that some actual members of the working class might reasonably want reopenings for reasons that have little or nothing to do with GOP CEOs’ stock holdings.

You should find an actual member of the working class and ask them. I guarantee that you are not one.

DP. You are right- I am a government employee and am grateful that I am not likely to lose my job. But I have plenty of family members who are working class, some are still working in essential positions. My 66yo dad has no business being out there working with his smoking history but he fears losing his paycheck more than the virus. So he continues to work.

The tone deafness in this board is astounding to me sometimes. Be the liberal you profess to be and put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

Exactly what do you think should be done?

DP. Maybe just try to think a little harder about a response other than "you first" and stock market gains.

+1. It’s incredibly rude and out of touch.

It’s a bumper sticker, not an argument.

So, none of you guys have any idea what should be done but you definitely want someone else to go first. Have I got that right?

There are contrary opinions about reopening, such as from Scott Atlas. And yes, he could be dismissed by some as Hoovered-up, just as some in the other crowd could be dismissed as having a politically-driven panic agenda of electing Joe Biden that really has little to do with concern about hose in poverty. If safe means zero chance of becoming ill, it’s going to be a long road. I’m still unsure about go first, given that essential workers have been going first for some time now. If the all-clear is given by governors, and one’s employer orders him or her back to the office, and one needs to earn a living, is that going first?

[Anonymous]

Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The crazy Mayor of Las Vegas, Carolyn Goodman, offering up the lives of her city's residents for a coronavirus "control group", was the wife of a mafia lawyer whose clients included Meyer Lansky.

The Mob. Just remember. It is always the mob with this bunch. KellyAnne's family. McGahn's family. The Trump family...all mob.

When asked if she would put herself on the casino floor with the workers she’d be endangering, the mayor dodges before saying, “first of all, I have a family.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

If you don't have preexisting conditions and you aren't over 65 this has been the case since day one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

Except for a few days in NYC, no, the hospitals have not been overrun. That is BECAUSE of the social distancing. Without that and without testing, it WILL be a mess. That is the whole problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

Except for a few days in NYC, no, the hospitals have not been overrun. That is BECAUSE of the social distancing. Without that and without testing, it WILL be a mess. That is the whole problem.

Is there anyone here arguing against the efficacy of social distancing? Why are you shouting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

If you don't have preexisting conditions and you aren't over 65 this has been the case since day one

1) not true
2) have you actually spoken to anyone who has the virus and recovered from it?

I have. They are not fully recovered, the lung damage is unbearable and may be permanent. I know that isn't for every survivor, but it seems to be a recurring theme for some. And I am talking about otherwise healthy 30's/40's people who exercise daily, eat well etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

Except for a few days in NYC, no, the hospitals have not been overrun. That is BECAUSE of the social distancing. Without that and without testing, it WILL be a mess. That is the whole problem.

Is there anyone here arguing against the efficacy of social distancing? Why are you shouting?

Because I wasn't saying the hospitals were overrun, and I mistinterpreted your post to suggest otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think that some actual members of the working class might reasonably want reopenings for reasons that have little or nothing to do with GOP CEOs’ stock holdings.

You should find an actual member of the working class and ask them. I guarantee that you are not one.

DP. You are right- I am a government employee and am grateful that I am not likely to lose my job. But I have plenty of family members who are working class, some are still working in essential positions. My 66yo dad has no business being out there working with his smoking history but he fears losing his paycheck more than the virus. So he continues to work.

The tone deafness in this board is astounding to me sometimes. Be the liberal you profess to be and put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

Exactly what do you think should be done?

DP. Maybe just try to think a little harder about a response other than "you first" and stock market gains.

+1. It’s incredibly rude and out of touch.

It’s a bumper sticker, not an argument.

So, none of you guys have any idea what should be done but you definitely want someone else to go first. Have I got that right?

DP but masks and social distancing should be in place except for the actual current hot spots. Most people should be working again

DP. The problem is that the response has been all over the place. Some states, like MD where I live, have put forward a reasonable plan. When the criteria are met and I’m asked to go back to work and return the kids to school/daycare, I will go. I accept a certain level of risk- the point of the social distancing measures is largely to slow things down, not bubble wrap everyone until there is a vaccine. I know there is a good chance we will be exposed or get it at some point.

But then you have states like GA with idiot governors flying by the seat of their pants.

Don’t worry, this will be our future soon in MD. Only a matter of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safe doesn't mean no one gets the virus. Safe means the hospitals are not overrun, that there are enough supplies and capacity to handle the demand, and that there is testing and tracing sufficient to identify and contain where needed.

We have NONE of that right now and the testing piece, which should have been the easiest, is the piece that is the furthest behind.

That is 100% on the Trump Administration.

Yes, the administration gets the blame. But is it factually accurate to say that “the hospitals” are overrun? Some may still be, but others are definitely not. Some hospitals are laying off employees. That’s all part of safe, but I think we have to think a little more broadly. Safe should mean that we have gotten to the point where we can say that there is close to zero chance of anything serious from the virus for most people. Whether that means waiting for a vaccine is to be determined.

Except for a few days in NYC, no, the hospitals have not been overrun. That is BECAUSE of the social distancing. Without that and without testing, it WILL be a mess. That is the whole problem.

Is there anyone here arguing against the efficacy of social distancing? Why are you shouting?

Because I wasn't saying the hospitals were overrun, and I mistinterpreted your post to suggest otherwise.

It won’t take much at all for many rural hospitals to be overwhelmed. As soon as things open up, there will be more outbreaks, and yes some hospitals will be overrun.