DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Groundhog Day: COVID-19

I seem to remember DeWine saying something to the effect of "Officers won't be pulling people over/hyper-vigilant..." I got the feeling that you really had to be blatantly disregarding the order to even have an officer roll up on you.

Not my take, but it's hard to argue with math.

It’s estimated that 300,000 people will die EVERY DAY from the economic shutdown, for a total of 130,000,000 deaths. Compare that to 200,000 global Covid-19 deaths.
Why can people who feel vulnerable or afraid not just shelter in place themselves, so that these other people can live? We all agree that ‘flattening the curve’ does not stop coronavirus, but only slows it, and that viral transmission through communities is necessary for herd immunity.
Seriously asking. I don’t understand the rationale of what we’re doing, nor how any thinking and feeling person supports it.
“An additional 130 million people could be on the brink of starvation by the end of 2020 as a result of the outbreak and its economic ramifications.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1189326

That's true. Some wish to use the exception to the rule, the rare occurrences as the rule. It's great for shock value.

As with anything else, when you are taking actions that threaten the health and safety of others, steps must be taken to protect their possible victims.

Except with this it appears.

So you're not actually talking about 300,000 people a day dying now. You're talking about it being "a possibility" if things don't improve by the end of the year. Got it.

Your article talks more about a food shortage killing millions rather than US stay at home orders killing people.

There's a way to produce food and get it to nations about to experience famine, one of which was not us listed, while also keeping people safe with stay at home orders.

Be careful with the jump to conclusions mat.

Devil, I don't see it that way. You are right in that the risk is relatively the same but the reward is much different. We need food, medicines, household necessities to survive. We can live without Kohl's cash and the latest spring fashion. Besides Walmart, Target, Meijer all sell clothing essentials, electronics, etc. So there is a source for most things we need. So the objection is really about competition and jobs versus limiting exposure to as many as possible.

Indeed I can't and I don't have a problem admitting that.

But we jumped from voluntary compliance to criminalizing non-compliance without justification. Social distancing works. But again, we don't even have a general idea of the efficacy. So how do you tell people "the restrictions work. We can't tell you how much they work, but more is better so we're going to increase restrictions AND put you in jail if you refuse to comply"?

Death projections have been way off since the beginning of this, and have been lowered numerous times. So it seems everything has been "possibilities". Got it?

Death projections lowered because people stayed at home. They're going to rocket right back up if we suddenly loosen all restrictions.

I got it. You're countering possibilities with a possibility.

Once again, those who have "gone to jail" are very few and far between. Making a point out of something that rarely happens seems rather more for sensationalism than anything.

You seem to wish to ignore very health expert in America and their evidence of how much these measures help. The vast majority of Americans disagree with you as do I.

We all know laws are in place to help protect innocent victims. These laws are no different. You contention seems to be based on, "Yeah, but how much do they help"?

You do realize more Americans have died from the virus than died fighting the Vietnam war, right? The only difference is they would arrest you if you didn't offer to die back then.

I see your point. But if the exception is truly about "necessities", then they should also be limiting what you can purchase. Every minute I spend in that store that is open for things that aren't necessary or essential, is another minute I am putting some random person at risk.


And none of these restrictions are actually based on numbers. It's solely the judgement of the Governor in my state. I won't speak for other states but it doesn't sound like they have much in the way of accountability or oversight either. On the radio just a few minutes ago our Governor admitted that we're flattening the curve (which was the original goal) but that he wants to see "a little more". What the hell is that supposed to mean?

You know how we could really tell what we are doing is necessary and legal? Governors, legislators, mayors, and councils should forego their pay for as long as the gov't has private business shut down. The people in charge of these need more skin in the game than just whether or not they'll get re-elected.

The point is that you don't have to make special trips or go to more places to get what you need as well as what you want. On one hand it seems you are against restrictions while on the other hand suggesting more restrictions.

Most of them are so corrupt they don't need their paycheck to live comfortably.

I'm suggesting consistency in the rationale.

I am out for the day. It was fun!

(Yes, Interment is rather sensationalist... but the premise still stands. Govt inevitably gets an inch and tries to take a mile. You and many others have commented on multiple other topics about abuse of power and over reach of police authority. Please don't be short sighted enough to think that what you are willing to let happen won't be used and/or abused going forward. We're lucky enough that our form of gov't affords us the opportunity to put the genie back in the bottle, but that typically doesn't happen without a lot pain.

j/c...

100% truth.

The measures taken have been effective.
Which individual measures account for the bulk of the effectiveness is up for grabs. It is my bet, and that of many people - including Sweden - that basic measures take care of the vast majority of the required effectiveness and all of the extra, most restrictive measures, are nothing but an exercise in diminishing returns.

That sounds like a projection model even more grossly inflated than the COVID ones. Like, where they take absolute worst-case scenario for every metric so that it compounds.


Also, that HAS to be a global number.

The numbers are global and focus mainly on impoverished areas of East Africa, war torn areas like Yemen and Syria, etc...

From the article...

Famine in as many as three dozen countries is "a very real and dangerous possibility" due to ongoing wars and conflicts, economic crises and natural disasters, World Food Program Executive Director David Beasley told the U.N. Security Council during a virtual briefing.

Before the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, 821 million people experience chronic hunger while another 135 million people face "crisis levels of hunger or worse," Beasley said while quoting findings from the agency's new report on global food crises.

Beasley pointed to the economic crisis in Lebanon, wars in Syria and Yemen, and the swarms of desert locusts destroying crops for much of East Africa as pre-existing factors that were already setting 2020 up to be a dangerous year for hunger.

I know that some cities in Pakistan were either not locking down or the people were deliberately ignoring them because locking down would mean death by starvation.

Interestingly, we're not seeing stories about mass COVID outbreaks there, either. Or, at least I haven't seen any, but I've also not been following thing the way I was when this was ramping up.

COVID-19 deaths in the U.S., last 10 days:

April 28: 2,470
April 27: 1,384
April 26: 1,157
April 25: 2,065
April 24: 1,957
April 23: 2,340
April 22: 2,358
April 21: 2,683
April 20: 1,952
April 19: 1,570

Total number of coronavirus cases in the U.S.: 1,050,071

U.S. Deaths: 60,438
U.S. Recoveries: 119,068

We will hit 100,000 deaths before June 1st IMHO.

No doubt about it, actually.
We'd have to drop below 1,250 deaths for every single day from now until then in order to NOT hit 100k by then. I just don't think that's going to happen.

I think it is far more likely that we hit 125k by then. In fact, just maintaining our current average for those last ten days listed will put us at 120k by May 31 and at 100k by May 21/22, if I did my math correctly.

We need the R0 below 1.

We also have to factor in an uptick for the "openings".

The hope is that, of course, it will burn itself out.

Well, that's just not going to be happening. I haven't seen any numbers on it, but I would venture a guess that even in the current lockdown, we're still above 1. We're just not going to get below 1, and even if we do, we will not be able to sustain it long enough for burnout to occur.

Additionally, even if we somehow did, unless we got the entire rest of the world to do it at the exact same time and nobody relaxes measures until it is eradicated, it will simply come back and in three months, again, we'll be right where we are.

Quite simply, the most appropo thing I can think of is this:

“If you're going through hell, keep going.”
--Winston Churchill

Meaning, don't stop in it and hope for cooler weather; keep going. For us, that means marching toward herd immunity in a manner that doesn't swamp the Emergency Rooms.

Exactly. The whole point of self-quarantine was give hospitals a chance to prepare without overwhelming them, give ppe manufactures time to ramp up, and give scientists an opportunity to better understand what we were dealing with. It was never meant to be a cure. Like you said, unless you manage to completely eradicate it from the world (which will never happen), it's always going to come back at some point.

Now that we've had a chance to prepare, we need to do what we can to avoid spreading it, and take further precautions if you're high risk. If certain areas have flare-ups, then start enabling stricter guidelines. Continue to ramp up production of medical goods and always look to adapt and gain more knowledge. But we can't just drive ourselves into bankruptcy and starvation hoping it just goes away completely.

My users have begun calling the stimulus payments "Plague Money".

I literally just got my Plague Money.

I intend to buy a Plague Mask from Amazon. They have some pretty cool steampunk masks.

What's next, zombie apocalypse money?

I've seen Zombieland. Money is useless in a zombie apocalypse.

They don't have Fresh Flesh stores in Zombieland?

Weird that you mention a Zombie Apocalypse.

I was in the hospital on the 1st of April and didn't get to do the April Fools Prank on my users.

So, we are having it tomorrow, and I'm turning one of my games into the Zombie Apocalypse. The users are going to completely flip out and I'm going to laugh at them all day lol

HAH!!!

j/c

Missing family and friends? Just coordinate your shopping schedules and you can see them all at Walmart.

Delivery date for masks.... June 15th 2020 to Aug 31st 2049