Coronavirus Outbreak...

[simplicio]

Time to stop air travel to the US?

Interesting question, especially when we look at all the changing views over the last month.

Should we ban travel from China? There are (almost) no new cases from China; they have effectively halted the spread of SARS-CoV-2. So is it about dealing with the epidemic, or a political and symbolic gesture?

[NorrinRadd]

Yeah, why have input from guys who know science to tackle a problem in medical science.

I didn't say to have NO input from them, ass-hat.

There has been conflict between experts in various fields. The med-sci nerds are not the only ones who matter, and they are not always right.

Societies are dynamic, we will recover. We have had epidemics for the whole of human history.

Sure. But what's the point if society is wrecked?

(I remember a Louisiana shrimp boat captian who claimed that the Gulf Shrimping and fishing would never, ever, could not, recover from the oil spill. It did.)

Big deal. One (or two) industries in one region. We're shutting down *many* industries and killing *thousands* of small businesses all over the country -- including many in regions with *zero* known cases.

And that's just the economic impact. What about the psychological and societal impact of enforced isolation? For ten years or more, experts have been warning us about the dangers of our increasing social isolation and dependence on "screen" interaction, and now suddenly it's supposed to be GOOD for us? Has anyone consulted psychologists and sociologists about the impacts of these lockdowns? I'd be shocked if they don't lead to an epidemic of anxiety, depression, and such polar opposite reactions as learned helplessness passivity and reckless outbursts of anger and frustration.

[simplicio]

I didn't say to have NO input from them, ass-hat.

There has been conflict between experts in various fields. The med-sci nerds are not the only ones who matter, and they are not always right.

Sure. But what's the point if society is wrecked?

Big deal. One (or two) industries in one region. We're shutting down *many* industries and killing *thousands* of small businesses all over the country -- including many in regions with *zero* known cases.

And that's just the economic impact. What about the psychological and societal impact of enforced isolation? For ten years or more, experts have been warning us about the dangers of our increasing social isolation and dependence on "screen" interaction, and now suddenly it's supposed to be GOOD for us? Has anyone consulted psychologists and sociologists about the impacts of these lockdowns? I'd be shocked if they don't lead to an epidemic of anxiety, depression, and such polar opposite reactions as learned helplessness passivity and reckless outbursts of anger and frustration.

Have you not heard it said "Choose life"?

The "Let it rip" comment was a quote about how the Presidents plan is summarized. Should we let it rip through the population and suffer the high death tolls?

Society will be wrecked? Is what we have now the be-all and end-all, the measure of all things? The panic buying (even among Christians who claim to rely on the Lord's will) betrayed a particular anxiety among us already.

We have the science nerds who who base their views, proposed actions in the face of uncertainty, on reason. Then we have Trump who relies on his scientific intuition, providing us with a leadership style that is mercurial, contradictory, and false. Captain Bonespurs is a wartime president indeed, but even small unit leaders know that sometimes a cool and collected head is needed. Which is why so many Americans see Fauci, Brix and the familiar faces of security, not Trump (and even the Governors have learned to handle Trump).

The example of the Gulf fishing and shrimping shows that hyperbolic statements are not effective, Louisiana shrimp had to re-sell and rebrand itself to America.

[Watermelon]

[carpedm9587]

Problem is, your logic assumes new infections vs more robust testing.

Ummm..no. My logic is about the trend in the numbers. It says nothing about the cause of the trend in the numbers. I am perfectly aware, as I have said many times, that it is very likely the testing is uncovering an existing iceberg of cases, as well as emerging new cases.

The other things in the post (i.e., the WHO report and Trump has to go) were tangential and not statements rooted in the numbers per se.

[simplicio]

In a couple weeks the US may be the epicenter of the corona virus outbreak. Why let northern Italy have that spot? China has abandoned the title of "epicenter".

It would a measure of our health system and government effectiveness.

[simplicio]

Ummm..no. My logic is about the trend in the numbers. It says nothing about the cause of the trend in the numbers. I am perfectly aware, as I have said many times, that it is very likely the testing is uncovering an existing iceberg of cases, as well as emerging new cases.

The other things in the post (i.e., the WHO report and Trump has to go) were tangential and not statements rooted in the numbers per se.

I saw a report that the "attack rate" ( a new term to me) for NY was 28%, while other states were at 8%. But NY judiciously recommends not testing!

[carpedm9587]

Your last paragraph: Your derogatory term moron-in-chief is inappropriate. Trump launched his career as a disciple of Roy Cohn, so litigator-in-chief would be more approriate. Given that Trump has modeled his life under Roy Cohn's tutelage, any attempt to determine any intelligence in Trump is irrelevant and impossible.

The elevation of the economic factors over any valuation on life is something which shows the cracks in the pro life crowd which likes to present life as sacred and of infinite (unbounded) worth. This valuation is popping up all over, and some in the pro life side is quite alarmed over this (such as the language over triage) away from its combat connotation of doing the most good with limited resources.

It will be interesting to see how Dr Fauci and others in the administration will address this, officials who break with Trump are pushed aside ruthlessly.

And Carpedm, please keep me in your prayers, as these are time which try men's souls: I am almost tempted to vote Dem for the first time. (Hail Mary, full of grace.......)

Yeah...I am rightly chastised. I am not a fan of the prevalent name calling on this forum or in life, and I succumbed to my outrage at this travesty of a leader and resorted to a 3rd-grade, school-yard tactic. Name calling does not much more than show the immaturity of the name caller, and I acted immaturely in slipping into that space. Mea culpa.

As for praying for you, the best I can offer is to keep you in my thoughts and send some positive thoughts your way. As for voting Dem...if this would indeed be your first time, I can think of no better time for doing it. I don't know if you have never voted for a Dem because you always vote along party lines, or if it is merely the case that the "other person" simply always was more aligned with your own values and priorities. If the former, I strongly recommend breaking that habit; it smacks of tribalism. If the latter (and that is my suspicion), sometimes we have to consider things beyond policies and platforms - and look at the person themselves. Trump and the GOP, IMO, are destroying important aspects of our democracy - most notably any semblance of value for the truth. As I have said many, many times, if Trump is the best leader the GOP can put forward, the GOP has badly lost its way. Cutting that particular head off might make room for a new and better head.

[simplicio]

Yeah...I am rightly chastised. I am not a fan of the prevalent name calling on this forum or in life, and I succumbed to my outrage at this travesty of a leader and resorted to a 3rd-grade, school-yard tactic. Name calling does not much more than show the immaturity of the name caller, and I acted immaturely in slipping into that space. Mea culpa.

As for praying for you, the best I can offer is to keep you in my thoughts and send some positive thoughts your way. As for voting Dem...if this would indeed be your first time, I can think of no better time for doing it. I don't know if you have never voted for a Dem because you always vote along party lines, or if it is merely the case that the "other person" simply always was more aligned with your own values and priorities. If the former, I strongly recommend breaking that habit; it smacks of tribalism. If the latter (and that is my suspicion), sometimes we have to consider things beyond policies and platforms - and look at the person themselves. Trump and the GOP, IMO, are destroying important aspects of our democracy - most notably any semblance of value for the truth. As I have said many, many times, if Trump is the best leader the GOP can put forward, the GOP has badly lost its way. Cutting that particular head off might make room for a new and better head.

GOP at one time represented conservative values along the line of Ronald Wilson Reagan, which is quite different from today's conservatism. And the religious rights arguments from twenty years ago have been pretty much replaced with schlock Christianity.

I think this present populism will end, but I think religions alliance with Trumpism will have repercussions.

[firstfloor]

Huge numbers here (UK) being furloughed and 80% of salary being paid by the Conservative Gov. Economic activity is slowing to a crawl.

[simplicio]

Huge numbers here (UK) being furloughed and 80% of salary being paid by the Conservative Gov. Economic activity is slowing to a crawl.

Are many on board with the governments reversal on the lock down?

[rogue06]

Pelosi and her gang did try to sneak funding for abortion into some legislation but it was dropped, but it has been the Senate Democrats who have been playing politics with funding. Surprisingly this was actually mentioned on NBC's Today Show this morning.

The show's primary co-host Savannah Guthrie started the broadcast by saying that

"Stalemate. Overnight, Senate Democrats blocked the nearly $2 trillion coronavirus aid package, saying it has a slush fund for big business. Republicans warning their rivals are playing with fire as the economy tanks."

Shortly afterwards she again ingeminated the charge:



Moreover, about a half hour later while interviewing the Democrat Governor of Illinois Jay "J.B." Pritzker, who like most Democrats seems largely focused on being politically correct about the Chicom coronavirus, Guthrie pressed him on whether his fellow Democrats in D.C. are right to stall relief efforts saying



Pritzker defended his colleagues stalling leading Guthrie to continue in a manner that until now is done exclusively to non-liberals asking him "Well, how long do you want Democrats to hold this line?" A confused Pritzner, apparently not used to this sort of question from a member of the MSM, stammered "Say it again." leading to Guthrie reiterate:



Kudos to her for actually holding Democrats accountable for their placing ideology above expediency during this crisis. I wonder how long it'll be before NBC announces that she is on a leave of absence and replaces her.

Apparently spoke too soon. Looks like Pelosi as well as Schumer are both playing politics and holding legislation up until they can figure out a way to make it benefit the Democrats

00000000000000ab000-00aaai4.jpg

[carpedm9587]

GOP at one time represented conservative values along the line of Ronald Wilson Reagan, which is quite different from today's conservatism. And the religious rights arguments from twenty years ago have been pretty much replaced with schlock Christianity.

I think this present populism will end, but I think religions alliance with Trumpism will have repercussions.

Oh I am fairly sure of the latter. It already has. AFAICT, the majority of young people are disgusted with the strange bedfellows that are the religious right and the Trump administration. That bodes well for the future, IMO. I had never been of the mind that religion is a danger to society, but I am increasingly finding myself questioning that position.

[carpedm9587]

Apparently spoke too soon. Looks like Pelosi as well as Schumer are both playing politics and holding legislation up until they can figure out a way to make it benefit the Democrats

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43479[/ATTACH]

And this is what TSD looks like...

[simplicio]

Oh I am fairly sure of the latter. It already has. AFAICT, the majority of young people are disgusted with the strange bedfellows that are the religious right and the Trump administration. That bodes well for the future, IMO. I had never been of the mind that religion is a danger to society, but I am increasingly finding myself questioning that position.

Its the young people who will transform things. There has been a breakdown of fundamentalism, younger generation is splitting, some into fiercer forms of fundamentalism, others leaving it; evangelical young have moved away from traditional forms, and the Catholic side has seen parallel changes. Evangelicalism will be quite different in a decade, the changes at the SBC are a sign things are changing. And many of those conservatives feel their views have been poorly served by the Republicans, though they also do not see the Dems as a home for themselves, which means there will be a grassroots religious right forming along new lines.