Anonymous wrote:"Opening Up" means all those people furloughed and currently qualifying for unemployment benefits due to COVID-19 will no longer be eligible for unemployment, and will have no choice but to work and risk exposure for income.

This is how you get people off unemployment. Meanwhile executives remain at low risk for exposure compared to customer facing employees.

Exactly. "Opening up" means putting money before health. For the most part, it is money for those wanting to open up and the health of others.

Anonymous wrote:So much nonsense.

Let's see. What's the mortality rate for children? And for healthy adults under 50?

Based on actual data already available, covid-19 is less lethal than the flu for those huge groups of people.

I think the best course of action for you would be to volunteer at a clinic that is dealing with COVID patients and be sure to go in sans PPE. Just imagine how empowering that will be.

Anonymous wrote:Jeff look at South Korea and Germany

They aren't testing everyone

I disagree with you politically but you are a smart guy

Quit spreading fear/falsehoods

They are testing way more than the US, and doing contact tracing, and started way earlier. The cat / virus is out of the bag in the US because of poor initial response from the Trump administration.

Had they responded properly in January, and not disbanded all the measures put in by multiple previous presidents from both parties, we could be at the stage Germany and South Korea are at right now. Now, in the US community spread is rampant and we have the choice of sacrificing the economy (temporarily) and giving enough aid to those who need it (instead of tax cuts for millionaires and 1200 total for everyone else who files taxes), or killing about 2-3% of the population (or more.)

We are left with a choice of
(1) Open now and kill 600,000+ (based on 2% of 328 million people in the US in 2019).
(2) Stay closed for a while longer and have than number be 100,000 or less

Just think. If you have 100 extended family members / friends / coworkers, and we open back up, at least 2 of those people will die. More if your family or coworkers are over 40 or have asthma, are overweight, have diabetes or an autoimmune condition. And you don't get to choose which 2+, it just depends on who the virus wants to take.

What's wrong with wearing masks?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Opening Up" means all those people furloughed and currently qualifying for unemployment benefits due to COVID-19 will no longer be eligible for unemployment, and will have no choice but to work and risk exposure for income.

This is how you get people off unemployment. Meanwhile executives remain at low risk for exposure compared to customer facing employees.

Pretty sure that more than just “executives” get to stay home and telework.

Waiters, retail, service industries? It's a big difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden leads Trump with voters 65 and over (senior citizens) 57 to 42. So I’m not sure I agree with the premise that the virus will take out old Trump supporters.

DP, but I think Jeff meant traditional GOP voters, who skew older.

I thought 65 or older was a virus risk group.

Anonymous wrote:"Opening Up" means all those people furloughed and currently qualifying for unemployment benefits due to COVID-19 will no longer be eligible for unemployment, and will have no choice but to work and risk exposure for income.

This is how you get people off unemployment. Meanwhile executives remain at low risk for exposure compared to customer facing employees.

Pretty sure that more than just “executives” get to stay home and telework.

Anonymous wrote:Biden leads Trump with voters 65 and over (senior citizens) 57 to 42. So I’m not sure I agree with the premise that the virus will take out old Trump supporters.

DP, but I think Jeff meant traditional GOP voters, who skew older.

Wear your face covering, people.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty certain that at least some people who aren’t part of the “ruling” class would benefit if some businesses opened up if it was deemed safe by reasonable governors of their respective states.

They will benefit right up to the point that they are infected with coronavirus.

I’m but sure I follow. The better recommendation, then, will be to remain “shut down” nationwide until a reliable vaccine and universal testing are in place? That would seem to dovetail with Dr. Emanuel’s suggestion that the “shut down” needs up to 18 more months.

Yes, the shutdown should continue until there is sufficient testing in place (or a vaccine though that is not likely to happen first). A properly organized testing program would prioritize essential workers -- not only healthcare workers but other such as South Dakota meat packers -- so that they can do their jobs. Then, as the program grows, start to include less essential workers. Leave those of us go can telecommute to the very end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's stay shutdown for the next 18 months.

This. Anyone who can afford to stay home, should stay home. Done.

But the “ruling” class are the ones who can afford to stay home, no? For others, would you suggest, as Sen. Josh Hadley - R (MO) has done, that the government pay up to 80 percent of workers’ wages? I support that.

"Opening Up" means all those people furloughed and currently qualifying for unemployment benefits due to COVID-19 will no longer be eligible for unemployment, and will have no choice but to work and risk exposure for income.

This is how you get people off unemployment. Meanwhile executives remain at low risk for exposure compared to customer facing employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's stay shutdown for the next 18 months.

This. Anyone who can afford to stay home, should stay home. Done.

Btw, I risk my life every time I get in my car.
Yet I do it.
- SP

Biden leads Trump with voters 65 and over (senior citizens) 57 to 42. So I’m not sure I agree with the premise that the virus will take out old Trump supporters.

Anonymous wrote:Jeff look at South Korea and Germany

They aren't testing everyone

I disagree with you politically but you are a smart guy

Quit spreading fear/falsehoods

Both of those countries have much higher per capita testing than the US does. Germany tests 1 in 90 people. South Korea tests 1 in 119. The US is only testing 1 in every 273.

Without proper testing, we have to assume that everyone is potentially infected. Only testing can allow us to have more targeted quarantining.