On a scale of 0-10, how worried are you about coronavirus?

[bmw]

Considering the original projections, YES, that "mere 60,000" is an excellent number.

Once you accept that pandemics are a part of life - that they have always been a part of life, and that they will always be a part of life, I would say we're going to get out of this one, at least in terms of raw death toll, VERY GOOD.

Again - it is not a question of whether or not these lives will be mourned by their loved ones (they absolutely will), rather, it is a question of whether it is justifiable at this point in time, given what we now know, to continue this absurd lockdown. That is the question.

As to whether I would have the same reaction to 60,000 killed in a terrorist attack: fair question. And I would answer that there is a difference between an intentional taking of lives and mother nature taking lives. At least, as far as government response is concerned.

[bmw]

Try micromanaging the idiot at the front of the room. I am amazed how you are capable of ignoring the biggest problem in Washington D.C.

Considering the death toll is now projected to reach about 60,000 and you were projecting it to be well into the millions, I'd say that the "idiot in the White House" is by that objective measure doing a damn fine job.

And you still act like it’s all over never to return and not one more death to boot...

And you act like having the economy shut down is no big deal. This is a balancing act. Trump was right - the cure can't be worse than the disease. I guess that you and I land on different sides of the balance. Fair enough. It is my view that at this point in time, the cure (continued lockdown) is far worse than the disease that remains.

[Turkeytop]

Considering the death toll is now projected to reach about 60,000 and you were projecting it to be well into the millions, I'd say that the "idiot in the White House" is by that objective measure doing a damn fine job.

If your President had ignored warnings of an imminent terrorist attack that ended up killing 60,000, would you still be defending him?

[bmw]

I answered that question above. Big difference between a natural disaster (that's basically what this is) and murder.

I remain unconvinced that there's anything else we could have done to further reduce the ultimate death count, at least once this virus got out of China.

[Rate This]

Try micromanaging the idiot at the front of the room. I am amazed how you are capable of ignoring the biggest problem in Washington D.C.

Considering the death toll is now projected to reach about 60,000 and you were projecting it to be well into the millions, I'd say that the "idiot in the White House" is by that objective measure doing a damn fine job.

And you still act like it’s all over never to return and not one more death to boot...

And you act like having the economy shut down is no big deal. This is a balancing act. Trump was right - the cure can't be worse than the disease. I guess that you and I land on different sides of the balance. Fair enough. It is my view that at this point in time, the cure (continued lockdown) is far worse than the disease that remains.

Do this calculation...
171,718 divided by 2,500,000... tell me what percentage you get and what it represents.

[TC Talks]

Using your own assumptive logic, all of the activities that involves stay-in-place have worked to create a very low death rate. So the further that logic, following the same safe science and data-driven process on the downside of the Apex would be prudent, correct?

Because if you just acknowledge that 60000 is a success, we should keep doing what has been successful.

Thank you for supporting the scientific approach. Keeping the economy closed has not produced massive deaths. If anything, car accidents are down, shootings are down, crime is down.

[Turkeytop]

Using your own assumptive logic, all of the activities that involves stay-in-place have worked to create a very low death rate. So the further that logic, following the same safe science and data-driven process on the downside of the Apex would be prudent, correct?

Because if you just acknowledge that 60000 is a success, we should keep doing what has been successful.

Thank you for supporting the scientific approach. Keeping the economy closed has not produced massive deaths. If anything, car accidents are down, shootings are down, crime is down.

It's like he's jumped from a plane. A parachute is taking him to a safe landing. So he says to himself, "This isn't bad. I can take the parachute off now"

[HD74]

https://www.newyorker.com/science/medic ... oronavirus

[bmw]

TT - there's also a difference between whether your landing site is a pool full of crocodiles (the economic fallout if we stay shut down) or a big comfy mattress (if we get things going again). In other words - the parachute may be useless if you don't have a safe place to land.

Personally, I'd rather land on a big comfy mattress with no parachute than with a parachute into a big pool of crocodiles. At least with the mattress I have a chance.

[bmw]

Using your own assumptive logic, all of the activities that involves stay-in-place have worked to create a very low death rate. So the further that logic, following the same safe science and data-driven process on the downside of the Apex would be prudent, correct?

How do you figure? The actual death rate was going to be the same regardless of whether 10,000 or a million people got it. The only way that rate goes up is if the hospital system gets overrun (which for the most part, it has not). If hundreds of thousands of people in Los Angeles county are infected, how exactly did the lockdown slow the spread? Unless you're contending that millions would have it by now if they hadn't locked down. In which case, at least we'd be closer to herd immunity. I continue to believe that all we're doing is delaying the inevitible.

[Rate This]

TT - there's also a difference between whether your landing site is a pool full of crocodiles (the economic fallout if we stay shut down) or a big comfy mattress (if we get things going again). In other words - the parachute may be useless if you don't have a safe place to land.

Personally, I'd rather land on a big comfy mattress with no parachute than with a parachute into a big pool of crocodiles. At least with the mattress I have a chance.

The damage is beyond a quick fix. It’s not just gonna snap back or be short and sharp. We have problems Houston.

[TC Talks]

Would it be more disruptive to open too quickly and cause a much bigger resurge or to reopen safely and have a manageable resurge.

I know which will have less deaths.

Every death we delay buys time to develop recovery solutions. The crocodiles in this situation is dead people not profit.

[screen glare]

The inevitable is a vaccine , bm.

If we all isolate at home - except for essential medical , food supply, emergency responders, etc. and practice social distancing to keep the illness/death rates from overwhelming medical facilities - we will see far fewer deaths - until a vaccine is available.

Trump is responding to the virus as if he’s Hoover instead of FDR in the great depression. Hoover could not abandon his republican political philosophy to use his presidential powers to mitigate and eventually end the people’s suffering

In contrast - FDR embraced pragmatism - and used his presidental powers to invent effective, long lasting, adequate, realistic federal programs to help the people - in all the ways they were suffering.


The difference between Hoover and Trump? Hoover wasn’t mentally ill with Narcissistic Personality Disorder - name calling, worrying only about himself, pitting American’s against each other, egging on violence, and praising himself at every turn while continuing to lie - to be reelected and hang onto power. Nor would Hoover OR Roosevelt welcome election interference by an enemy foreign power. Nor was either man impeached.

[bmw]

I keep hearing this "might have a much bigger resurgance" speculation. Why should I buy into that theory when the initial surge was way less than projected? It's the boy who cried wolf.

If a vaccine was weeks or a few months away, then the situation would be very different. But it isn't. It is 12-14 months off. The country can't wait that long.

btw - antibody immunity is as good as a vaccine. So if 15 or 20% of the population get it during the first wave, then the second way shouldn't be nearly as bad.

[Rate This]

I keep hearing this "might have a much bigger resurgance" speculation. Why should I buy into that theory when the initial surge was way less than projected? It's the boy who cried wolf.

If a vaccine was weeks or a few months away, then the situation would be very different. But it isn't. It is 12-14 months off. The country can't wait that long.

btw - antibody immunity is as good as a vaccine. So if 15 or 20% of the population get it during the first wave, then the second way shouldn't be nearly as bad.

How’s that calculation coming?

We don’t even know if recovering makes you immune or not... that’s an open question. So that’s some massive speculation with that last point.