"Opening up" means risking your life

[Anonymous]

“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Umm, you can open up the country and still keep people safe. It’s not a binary solution.

So what is your plan to protect people? More than 80,000 people are already dead.

What is your plan to protect people if 50% of businesses go bankrupt?

Does unemployment not kill? No higher incidents of domestic violence, murder, crime, suicide, medical problems, people not going to the doctors for medical problems not related to covid, cancers not detected until too late, long standing businesses closed, people losing their homes to foreclosures?

Well?

You can have your cake and eat it too. Look at South Korea. We don't have to have death either from the virus or from economic collapse. All we need is a leader and an educated reasonable population.

I don't think the folks waving weapons around are going to cooperate with contact tracing. We're a nation of Patient 31.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

What a stupid poll. How else would someone answer that the way it is phrased?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Umm, you can open up the country and still keep people safe. It’s not a binary solution.

So what is your plan to protect people? More than 80,000 people are already dead.

Wear a mask, wash your hands, vote straight republican, and hold China accountable. That’s how you keep people safe.
Now open the damn country up.

Hahahaha you know most of those folks waving weapons around aren't wearing masks and sure as fark aren't going to cooperate with contact tracing, right?

And what does "holding China accountable" mean other than a quick soundbite?

I mean, what did Trump do when he had both houses about holding China accountable or even making us less reliant on Chinese supply chains.

Obama's been out of office for three years. I remember you guys complaining about Obama mentioning Bush in late 2009, so stop complaining about Obama and focus on the fact that you have the Senate, the Presidency, most state legislatures, a majority of governors, and a majority on SCOTUS. If you can't get things done with all that, it's all on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Umm, you can open up the country and still keep people safe. It’s not a binary solution.

So what is your plan to protect people? More than 80,000 people are already dead.

Wear a mask, wash your hands, vote straight republican, and hold China accountable. That’s how you keep people safe.
Now open the damn country up.

+1

The vulnerable are still getting it. Let the rest go free. If you are vulnerable or live with someone who is, then take precautions.

Right now, in Virginia, it is the nursing homes that have the problem. The poor people who live in high density are also vulnerable. Concentrate on those populations.

The vulnerable depend on the rest of us to not spike the case load. I actually care about our fellow citizens. Imagine if you were on the Titanic! “Sucks to be a woman or child, suckers!!! Out of my way.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

It has always been bullshit with the whole “think about the poors” since none of those people would ever support universal healthcare or UBI or stronger unemployment benefits. After all, you don’t want poor people to get used to anything other than life and death struggle!

[Anonymous]

Do we stay inside during flu season? Close schools? No. Tell these fascist governors to reopen and let’s get in with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we stay inside during flu season? Close schools? No. Tell these fascist governors to reopen and let’s get in with it.

I realize you are dumber than dirt, but here goes...
Flu has a vaccine.
Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

What a stupid poll. How else would someone answer that the way it is phrased?

+1 also unemployment benefits are really good right now too. Many folks are actually making more now than when they were working

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

What a stupid poll. How else would someone answer that the way it is phrased?

I think the choice between those two views sums up the two sides pretty well. How would you have phrased it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we stay inside during flu season? Close schools? No. Tell these fascist governors to reopen and let’s get in with it.

I realize you are dumber than dirt, but here goes...
Flu has a vaccine.
Thank you.

NP here. You do realize that the flu vaccine only lowers your likelihood of getting the flue by 40-60% on any given year, right? It isn't a silver bullet, yet life goes on with a slim chance that you could in fact catch a flu that kills you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we stay inside during flu season? Close schools? No. Tell these fascist governors to reopen and let’s get in with it.

I realize you are dumber than dirt, but here goes...
Flu has a vaccine.
Thank you.

NP here. You do realize that the flu vaccine only lowers your likelihood of getting the flue by 40-60% on any given year, right? It isn't a silver bullet, yet life goes on with a slim chance that you could in fact catch a flu that kills you.

How many people die (on average), due to the flu? Over how long a period? How many people have died from COVID-19? Over how long a period?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we stay inside during flu season? Close schools? No. Tell these fascist governors to reopen and let’s get in with it.

I realize you are dumber than dirt, but here goes...
Flu has a vaccine.
Thank you.

NP here. You do realize that the flu vaccine only lowers your likelihood of getting the flue by 40-60% on any given year, right? It isn't a silver bullet, yet life goes on with a slim chance that you could in fact catch a flu that kills you.

There is 0% immunity in our population... I just can’t with you people. Just get out there. 1 percent fewer of you will be meaningful in November. Just do it already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“A Washington Post-Ipsos poll asked whether people preferred being more aggressive even if it means economic hardship OR opening businesses even if it means more infections.

People who have been laid off or furloughed are actually **more** in favor of staying aggressive.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/washington-post-ipsos-coronavirus-employment-survey-april-27-may-4/4bd8dd8b-1257-4d5f-b3c1-0af6c38f060d/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2

What a stupid poll. How else would someone answer that the way it is phrased?

I think the choice between those two views sums up the two sides pretty well. How would you have phrased it?

Can't you see how slanted the language is

How about this

Studies have shown hospitalization rates for the majority of Americans from Covid 19 are extremely low. Job losses are worse than the great depression.

Given this should we

Slowly allow businesses to reopen so people can get back to work
Remain completely shutdown for 18 months until their is a vaccine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Hahahaha you know most of those folks waving weapons around aren't wearing masks and sure as fark aren't going to cooperate with contact tracing, right?

And what does "holding China accountable" mean other than a quick soundbite?

I mean, what did Trump do when he had both houses about holding China accountable or even making us less reliant on Chinese supply chains.

Obama's been out of office for three years. I remember you guys complaining about Obama mentioning Bush in late 2009, so stop complaining about Obama and focus on the fact that you have the Senate, the Presidency, most state legislatures, a majority of governors, and a majority on SCOTUS. If you can't get things done with all that, it's all on you.

They aren't washing hands, either.