Hunter  GWPB wrote:
If I get hit by a car, does that mean my friends and family are going to get hit by cars?   My uncle got hit by a car while working when I was a kid. (He survived.)   Not one person in the family since then has been hit by a car.

If I get lung cancer by smoking (I don't and please don't smoke on my property), am I going to transmit the cancer to friends and family?

Gawd.

If you driving drunk and they are in the car with you...or the family in the other car you hit.

Anyone who has had someone with cancer in their family knows it affects the whole family, it is a terrible ordeal for loved ones to experience.

My question was, in reply to your question of what death rate is acceptable, was that what death rate is acceptable for everything else we do, which you clouded the water with side remarks instead of admitting the reality that every single thing we do in life comes with a certain risk of death.  There are serious injury and death statistics for every occupation, sports, activities, etc.  If we willing do that thing, we accept the risk.  The same goes with the virus. if I choose to go to work to feed my family and keep a roof over our heads, I accept all the risks, including the virus, of doing so.  If you don't want the risk, stay home.  What is not right is other people choosing who has the right to work, choosing what businesses can stay open, choosing who gets to make a living, choosing who loses everything they have worked for.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:

I was not aware we had a choice about cancer or a car wreck either.

The virus is actually quite similar.  If you smoke, you probably raise your chances of cancer.  If you don't drive carefully, you probably raise your chances of being in an accident.  If you don't use common sense precautions, you probably raise your chances of getting the virus.

None of this stops people from smoking or driving, why do we have to shut down everything, ruin many more lives than will ever catch the virus, wreck businesses and the economy over irrational fear?  Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feelnecessary.

Wow. You have apparently not been chastened since the previous embarrassing pandemic denialism:

"The youngest corona virus caused death in the US was 63 years old.  All had pre-existing health issues"

"Over 80% of those infected thus far in the US have recovered with minimal or no medical intervention. "

"Masks may actually help spread the virus because people who are not accustomed to wearing the masks tend to fiddle with the mask and touch their face more often. "

"The fear grows and grows as each death is reported, making it seem like a dire situation."

And now:
" Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary"

So to save the mods from acting, maybe you should take that randian libertarian nonsense over to Drudge, or Breitbart, or The Daily Caller where  those  views would be more welcome.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
I was not aware we had a choice about cancer or a car wreck either.

The virus is actually quite similar.  If you smoke, you probably raise your chances of cancer.  If you don't drive carefully, you probably raise your chances of being in an accident.  If you don't use common sense precautions, you probably raise your chances of getting the virus.

None of this stops people from smoking or driving, why do we have to shut down everything, ruin many more lives than will ever catch the virus, wreck businesses and the economy over irrational fear?  Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feelnecessary.

1) The death rate from cars over a typical 3 month period (comparing the last 3 months of COVID-19) is about 1/16th the rate as it was from COVID-19 and that's WITH all the lockdowns during that period.  Based on Sweden, those numbers would have been at least another 4 times higher without the lockdowns.  So the car accident death rate would have been about 1/64th the number compared to the deaths from COVID-19.  It's MUCH more serious.

AND we have ALL SORTS of legal restrictions on driving to reduce deaths.  Seat belts, car safety requirement and TONS of laws about how we drive on the road.

So how can you possibly use "car driving" as an excuse to do whatever you PERSONALLY feel fit to do (without any rules) with COVID-19?

2)  As has been repeatedly pointed out, what you do DOES NOT JUST AFFECT YOU.   It kills others that you come in contact with.  The "innocents".   PLUS the extreme rate of infections, also ends up, inevitably, TANKING THE ECONOMY.  Which effects EVERYONE.

As so many states are now figuring out the hard way, the only way the economy keeps growing and recovering, is by solving the COVID-19 issue that is causing it.  And SAFELY / carefully restarting things, step by step, once the numbers are safely WAY down.  When you don't have the all time record infectious rate (yesterday's world record for the U.S. for new infections), THEN there's all sorts of things you can do to get things going again.  Sustainably.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
[...]why do we have to shut down everything, ruin many more lives than will ever catch the virus, wreck businesses and the economy over irrational fear? [...]

Irrational fear?

A GLOBAL PANDEMIC with 12 MILLION cases,   with 3 MILLION of them right here in the USA.

133,000 DEAD.... right here in the USA

That is "why".

Irrational fear?  Wreck businesses?

How many customers you going to have when Florida gets hit as hard as NYC? (the experts say it is quite possible).

When 50% of the staff at your local wateringhole is in the hospital with the virus--- you still gonna run down and get a drink?

Southern Florida is near capacity for ICU beds right now---- how you going to feel when your wife/mom/daughter has to sit in the parking lot for 18 hours before she can get in the door? All the health officials in the state say the peak is still coming....

Irrational fear? Really?

Florida Stats:
Yesterday there were 9,989 new confirmed* cases, 0 recoveries, 48 deaths. The current 7-day rolling average of 9,256 new cases/day grew 130.6% from 14 days ago, in Florida
---   https://covidusa.net/?state=Florida

so- sorry if the PANDEMIC is a major pain in the ass for you---GEE, everybody else is having such fun. Sorry if your business is suffering (I really am) but I am more interested in living until Christmas than I am seeing your business survive (arent I selfish...)

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
If you driving drunk and they are in the car with you...or the family in the other car you hit.

Anyone who has had someone with cancer in their family knows it affects the whole family, it is a terrible ordeal for loved ones to experience.

My question was, in reply to your question of what death rate is acceptable, was that what death rate is acceptable for everything else we do, which you clouded the water with side remarks instead of admitting the reality that every single thing we do in life comes with a certain risk of death.  There are serious injury and death statistics for every occupation, sports, activities, etc.  If we willing do that thing, we accept the risk.  The same goes with the virus. if I choose to go to work to feed my family and keep a roof over our heads, I accept all the risks, including the virus, of doing so.  If you don't want the risk, stay home.  What is not right is other people choosing who has the right to work, choosing what businesses can stay open, choosing who gets to make a living, choosing who loses everything they have worked for.

Well, first off:  Bullshit.

Maybe you ought to take a look at the guy that was actually the one who clouded the issue with snide remarks about cigarette smoking and driving:
https://www.modelmayhem.com/forums/post … st19909938

Apparently you do not understand what "contagious" means.

Your right, if I am driving drunk, I am running the risk of hurting other people.  To avoid hurting other people, I don't drive drunk or even a little bit buzzed.  But if you are taking risks with the virus, you are not simply taking the risk for yourself.  You are the one driving drunk, all day, everyday, everywhere you go.  You're the one that is likely to hit a pedestrian.   You are the one that is going to kill a whole family in another car.  Your victims will be indiscriminately selected where ever you go.  You are not just driving drunk, you are careening down a sidewalk at a high rate of speed in an invisible car.

The fallacy in your ridiculous false parallel is that every one does take risks and everyone does something to mitigate the risks to an acceptable level.  They put seat belts on in the car.   They drive safer vehicles.  They don't step off of the curb in front of a speeding car.  They don't drive texting on a cell phone.  But the virus deniers, the ones too selfish to wear a mask; the ones that have a positive test and go out anyway- that is the drunk in the speeding car.  That is the guy walking through the crowds with a gun, shooting at people.  But, no one can tell who he is. 

It is absurd to compare a virus that can attack anyone to smoking cigarettes and driving.   I should have a zero chance of getting anything that is caused by smoking cigarettes, because I don't smoke and never did.  Obviously, I have taken the time to minimize the risk of getting sick from cigarettes.  (Besides it being a disgusting, foul and socially rude addiction.)  That doesn't mean I don't know people that died of cigarette related diseases.  But guess what, I can't catch emphysema or cancer from them by hugging them goodbye, or being in the same room as them.

In Pennsylvania, there are over 12 million people, and roughly 1000 die in all of the motor vehicle related crashes a year, but it isn't contagious!  Yes, I can cause a wreck that will take out other people.  Those people unfortunate enough to be right there when I fail to see a red light.  But the survivors and bystanders aren't going to go infect 15 more people with life threatening auto accidents.  In four months or so of the virus being in Pennsylvania, there have been over 97.000 cases and we are getting close to 7000 deaths.  And you want to compare this to driving a car?  On a straight line projection that would mean that 21,000 people will die every year compared to 1000 in vehicles.  But we don't know if there will be a straight line.  It can skyrocket.  Furthermore, we spend billions on reducing traffic deaths by building better roads, fixing high collision areas, putting up safety barriers,  making better engineered cars, by maintaining the brakes and other safety devices on our own vehicles.  It is only a tiny percentage of the population that gets into a car and never puts on a seatbelt, never stops at a red light and never obeys the speeded limit, because he isn't going to be told what to do because he lives in a free country.   

Why is it that one of the most noble things a person can do is join the armed services and then sacrifice his life for the good of the country, but the country is so filled with assholes that they will not serve their fellow country men by putting on a goddamn mask?

The question was put to you (by another member), is what is an acceptable risk?  You haven't answered that with numbers.  But apparently, what is acceptable to you is spreading carnage in your wake without a second thought.  Your silly dodges don't mean a thing.  I don't sky dive because I am afraid of dying.  I don't sky dive because it costs too much money.  We can sit here and list dangerous things all day that I can die of.  I walk in woods where there are rattlesnakes.  I have never been bitten.  But I still step on a log or look over it before I step to the other side.  If I screw up, it is only me and possibly the rattlesnake, that gets hurt.  A rattlesnake bite isn't contagious.  The risk is mine and mine alone.  And I have a way better chance of getting lyme's disease in the woods than a rattlesnake bite, so I mitigate that with Sawyer Tick repellent.  (Good stuff.)

And if your freakin' concerned about how horrible it is to die of cancer, and what that does to the family of the victim, have you looked at what CV-19 patients and families are going through?  And you are not concerned about giving it whole families?

Focuspuller wrote:
So to save the mods from acting, maybe you should take that randian libertarian nonsense over to Drudge, or Breitbart, or The Daily Caller where  those  views would be more welcome.

Why would the mods act?  What have I done that violates the rules here?  You would call the police on someone who says something you disagree with?  Because we may not agree on some things, you suggest I go somewhere else?

My ole Daddy used to say, "yes men are both useless and dangerous."  If you only are willing to hear things you personally agree with, you never have the opportunity to expand your understanding of the issues.

Personally, I enjoy hearing all sides of a discussion.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
[...]We cannot be so myopic in the focus on the virus that we fail to see how the extreme panic and knee jerk reactions have damaged so much of everyday lives.  Far more damage has been done to our economy, and quality of life, by the reaction to the fear than the virus has.
[...]

You do know that your theory has been tested, and failed, don't you?  In Sweden...?

The end result was 5 times more deaths AND, despite a short term economic gain, in the end the economy was no better off than the neighboring countries that, instead of staying open like Sweden, did go into a lockdown.

The difference is that those countries that did dramatically reduce the virus spread down to tiny numbers, are now successfully coming out of it and rebuilding, unlike Sweden.  Borders in the EU are selectively reopening (barring Americans and not including Sweden, etc).  So it looks like Sweden will also end up being the big economic loser in the area, and with a lot more deaths.

Bill Gates remarked that you can't expect people to go back to the way things were and "just ignore the pile of bodies in the corner".  It doesn't work that way.  Rebuilding the economy requires that their people and businesses have a realistic, but cautious, confidence.

Sort of like the cautious confidence that we now have in BC.  We took the necessary steps and reopened most of the economy 5 1/2 weeks ago.  But intelligently.  Very low COVID numbers when we reopened.  No nightclubs, large sporting or other mass gathering events, etc.  2 Weeks quarantine for anyone entering the province. People are still wearing masks while shopping but not when they're in large spaces enjoying the outdoors (at a distance from strangers).  The current strategy with our very low numbers, is that we can, carefully, resume about 60% of our previous (before COVID) social interactions.

The current BC results (unlike the strategies employed elsewhere for reopening)?  For the entire province, we currently have 20 COVID-19 cases in hospital with 4 of them in ICU.  That's AFTER reopening, way back, on June 1st. Compare all of that to your strategy as applied to Florida, Texas, Phoenix, etc, etc.  I also noticed yesterday that parking at a local shopping mall seems to be back up to about 80% of what it was before COVID.

Although we're at major risk once the U.S. border reopens, and no one, including any political leader at any level, is supporting opening that border.  We also are all well prepared for a second wave, presumably in the fall when more and more social interaction is done indoors instead of outdoors.  Or, after people who are infected from elsewhere, make their way into BC.   But we all know what we have to do and have all seen it work successfully, first hand.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
It amazes me how some are able to pick things apart down to the microscopic level while at the same time seem to be totally unable to see the big picture.

Nothing operates in a stand alone situation.  Everything done, or not done, affects everything else.  We cannot be so myopic in the focus on the virus that we fail to see how the extreme panic and knee jerk reactions have damaged so much of everyday lives.  Far more damage has been done to our economy, and quality of life, by the reaction to the fear than the virus has.  This is not going to go away next week.  We have to all calm down and find a balance, learn how to restore our lives and our economy.

It amazes me how some people only want to see the pictures that reinforce their own myopic views.  Have you looked at the facts of the results of how different countries handled this?  Sweden compared to its neighbors?  The early opening states compared to the slow opening states?  The states that were slow to the respond initially but then got very serious about it?

Pictures, novels and pandemics are a sum of their parts.  It has been 100 years since the "Kansas Flu" swept the world and we are approaching this one like we are still in 1918?   I am not sure which actions you are referring to as knee jerk:  Shutting down the economy as nations did that have controlled the virus are able to open fully; or throwing science out the window and sacrificing lives for cash?  (Actually, I know which knee jerk action you prefer.) 

Everything impacts everything else.  So, you think the economy is going to hum along fine when your clients are afraid of getting deathly ill if they go out?  You think that removing a few million people from the economy isn't going to impact the economy?  Funny thing, the virus has helped my business.  This is the busiest summer I have had since 2008.  Still a far cry slower than the 90s.  But I still have to work for my money, while fat cats and big businesses are feeding at the government trough.

While someone can stand in front of a camera and say, 'We don't want the cure to be worse than the disease,' then shouldn't the whole picture be considered?  Is the economy going to flourish because the disease is left to spread unchecked?  That is what the fantasy is.  But if the goal is for the cure to be better than the disease, then we should also be looking at the impacts on the health care system, the impacts on the economy with the economy wide open?  As you pointed out, what is the impact going to be on families?  On suffering?  On travel?  You think people should just ignore their fear?  Maybe the economy could be wide open if people that tested positive stayed home, if people wore masks, stayed away from each other- but we are a society that jams ourselves into the personal space of other people.  We can't pack airplanes and bars full and stay socially distant. 

If you aren't willing to look at all of the parts, then how can you see the big picture?

I use to have a pathology professor that stood in front of the class and mocked the response to the Chestnut Blight that made the American Chestnut all but extinct in the United States.  An important timber species for building and for wildlife- gone.  The blight was shipped over from Germany due to carelessness and greed and a definite lack of understanding of the impact of spreading diseases, even though through was plenty of experience using small pox to wipe out Indigenous People and mange to attack wolf populations.

In order to stop the spread of of the Chestnut Blight, they cut all of the Chestnuts from west to east for a hundred miles north and south.  And the disease jumped the line.  Turns out it was spread by birds.  Too bad they didn't actually look at the microscopic level.   Then instead of cutting trees, they could have just killed all of the birds.

It wasn't me that made false comparisons of the virus to other risks.   I suggest that if you want to criticize someone for not seeing the big picture, you should look in the mirror.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:

Why would the mods act?  What have I done that violates the rules here?  You would call the police on someone who says something you disagree with?  Because we may not agree on some things, you suggest I go somewhere else?

My ole Daddy used to say, "yes men are both useless and dangerous."  If you only are willing to hear things you personally agree with, you never have the opportunity to expand your understanding of the issues.

Personally, I enjoy hearing all sides of a discussion.

Maybe you missed the mod warnings about straying off topic. Personally I find posts like yours amusing and would miss having a good laugh as you try to justify the indefensible. However, I would not for a second get into a lifeboat with you. Would rather take my chances on the Titanic. Have a nice day taking care of yourself.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
It amazes me how some are able to pick things apart down to the microscopic level while at the same time seem to be totally unable to see the big picture.

Nothing operates in a stand alone situation.  Everything done, or not done, affects everything else.  We cannot be so myopic in the focus on the virus that we fail to see how the extreme panic and knee jerk reactions have damaged so much of everyday lives.  Far more damage has been done to our economy, and quality of life, by the reaction to the fear than the virus has.  This is not going to go away next week.  We have to all calm down and find a balance, learn how to restore our lives and our economy.

The only ones who are "panicking" with "knee jerk" reactions are you and your friends. Back to school? Open bars and restaurants? Sporting events?  A while back you were telling us the virus was overhyped. With the historic failure to stem the pandemic, unlike most of the world, NOW you want to BALANCE lives with COMMERCE? Tell us, what exactly are 130,000 lives worth? Ten DOW points? 100? 1000?

And your solution?

" Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary"

Just brilliant. Do whatever is in YOUR best interest. If that means forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions, why, that is your Ayn Rand -given RIGHT, isn't it? THAT is your BALANCE and it is shameful.

Focuspuller wrote:

The only ones who are "panicking" with "knee jerk" reactions are you and your friends. Back to school? Open bars and restaurants? Sporting events?  A while back you were telling us the virus was overhyped. With the historic failure to stem the pandemic, unlike most of the world, NOW you want to BALANCE lives with COMMERCE? Tell us, what exactly are 130,000 lives worth? Ten DOW points? 100? 1000?

And your solution?

" Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary"

Just brilliant. Do whatever is in YOUR best interest. If that means forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions, why, that is your Ayn Rand -given RIGHT, isn't it? THAT is your BALANCE and it is shameful.

how does "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" equate to "forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions"?

you do realize that ruined economies also kill people, don't you? most people in the world live day-by-day and cannot afford to cower-in-place for months on end.

DCurtis wrote:
how does "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" equate to "forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions"?

you do realize that ruined economies also kill people, don't you? most people in the world live day-by-day and cannot afford to cower-in-place for months on end.

Happy to explain.

YOU, as a business owner with employees, aka other people who are NOT you, decide that in YOUR business interest, you remain open and require your employees (other people) to return to your business, exposing them to possible infection or death, along with THEIR families (other people), and THEIR friends and THEIR families (more other people). YOU have decided that the collateral damage to your employees (other people) is, in YOUR opinion, worth the cost.YOU have decided the risks are balanced. Your employees have no choice.

And maybe if the BILLIONS going to friends and cronies of the president, went to the ordinary people and small businesses it was intended for, the economic PAIN you are so concerned about wouldn't be such an excuse for not doing all that is necessary to end the pandemic, which is THE ONE THING that will get the economy working again, not accepting death and sickness as the price of doing business.

Question for you: When it became obvious the pandemic was a real thing and the government response was incompetent to nonexistent, were you urging a better response, or were you downplaying the threat, and only now complaining about the damage to the economy brought on by the anemic response?

DCurtis wrote:
[...]
you do realize that ruined economies also kill people, don't you? most people in the world live day-by-day and cannot afford to cower-in-place for months on end.

DCurtis, I can sympathize. When your region, or country, gets hit with COVID-19, you're in a "no win" situation, and people will suffer.

The question is, what approach will get you through it in the shortest period possible, with the least amount of (overall) damage and pain?

Different countries and regions have tried different approaches and we have lots of examples to learn from.  Those that hit COVID-19 early and hard, came through it in the shortest amount of time and with the fewest casualties (at least for the first wave).   In areas where they simply tried to ignore it, it just got worse, and worse, and worse.  Becoming a far bigger problem than it ever was to begin with.  In those cases, it doesn't matter if the economy is officially "open for business", once it gets so bad people stop buying and lots of people end up out of work.  In Brazil, on top of the crazy high COVID rates, they now have almost a 50% unemployment rate.  That's no good for anybody.

So I'll repeat.  What approach will get you through it in the shortest period of time with the least overall pain / damage?

DCurtis wrote:
how does "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" equate to "forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions"?

An example. Elon Musk-owner of Tesla cars- defied the local county officials and reopened his manufacturing plant before health guidelines said it was OK.... To placate those who said he was asking his workers to return to unsafe conditions, he said those who felt unsafe could stay home, with no penalty.

Now... those that stayed home have received termination notices... and the Tesla factory has become a virus hot spot.

Here in the Bay Area- they opened---- and have now closed again----- multiple clubs and restaurants because STAFF got sick when they returned... prolonging the pain of restarting.

DCurtis wrote:
you do realize that ruined economies also kill people, don't you? most people in the world live day-by-day and cannot afford to cower-in-place for months on end.

Yeah. Pandemics are like that. Murderously unfair. Devastating to the poor and the medically under served.

So lets send them back to work before we know how to protect them...

Lets send the poorest, the least able to defend themselves BACK out to work---- the restaurant workers, the house cleaners, the maids in the hotels... the undocumented workers that keep the "hospitality" industry going....

Sending them back before we know how to do so safely--- well, at least we can say the business survived.... those critical gyms and tattoo parlors can open up NOW... and God Forbid we should close a bar. The economy was saved.

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
[...]This is not going to go away next week.  We have to all calm down and find a balance, learn how to restore our lives and our economy.

we have SO many examples of how to do that.... and how NOT to do that. Some places have been smart enough to do the right thing...and are recovering. Some places didnt do the things they knew they should. The pandemic is exploding in those places...

ALL the medical guidance we have at this point says crowds, without masks and social distancing is a formula for disaster.

Seems to me Florida, Texas, Arizona etc etc are FINE proof of that point.

There is a right way and a wrong way. Florida chose a path that has sent it into the worst outbreak in the US... but by God the bars got opened, the tattoo parlors were running, the beaches were crowded... the hotels filling up..... right up until the hospitals started overflowing.

DCurtis wrote:

how does "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" equate to "forcing your employees back to work in unsafe conditions"?

you do realize that ruined economies also kill people, don't you? most people in the world live day-by-day and cannot afford to cower-in-place for months on end.

When we fought in WW2, the public rallying cry wasn't, "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary."   I have found over years, that if I have to push a car up a hill, it is much easier if other people help, and if other people help, we should all be pushing in the same direction.  This country has rallied together to do great tasks before.  Why not now?

Ruined economies do kill people.  Does it matter what the cause of the ruined economy is?  Isn't the economy ruined if we stay home to avoid getting sick or if we stay home because we are sick?  What's the difference, other than the actual loss of life?  Are our only possibilities the false choice of closing tight or opening wide?  We have had a poorly designed bailout.  We have had a bailout for the rich.  Instead of fighting in court to deprive people of health care, maybe we should be working to provide health care.  Doesn't a lack of health care kill people, too?  Even without a pandemic a lack of health care kills people.  How great was our economy to begin with if a large amount of the population was teetering on the edge of disaster.  There is something wrong when our people are ensnared in a national emergency, and they are being put out on the streets, or the health care system was failed by political decisions, leaving people no option for care. 

Our leadership has surrendered.  They have turned their backs on the people and the fight.  Why are other countries succeeding and The United States of America is failing?

Aren't the people the measure of what is a great country?  Is this the best that a great country can do?  Die if you do or die if you don't?

ethasleftthebuilding wrote:
[...]why do we have to shut down everything, ruin many more lives than will ever catch the virus, wreck businesses and the economy over irrational fear? [...]

You say you enjoy seeing other viewpoints... here is a bit more of "why"...

This is a simple scroll down the page on ONE day (today) in the New York Times...

I think the question of which of us is seeing the "whole picture" is pretty clear...
=================================================

Covid19 updates from: The New York Times
--- https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/worl … e=Homepage

The world set a record for the most new virus cases, led by the United States.

The coronavirus pandemic is once again reaching record levels around the world: On Friday the World Health Organization announced a record number of new daily cases across the globe, a day after a New York Times database hit 223,116 new cases, its highest daily total so far.

It was the fifth time this month that the global daily number had surpassed 200,000.

The United States was the biggest source of new infections, reporting on Thursday more than 59,880 cases as it set a single-day record for the sixth time in 10 days. The other nations with the largest daily increases in cases were Brazil, India, South Africa and Mexico.[...]
----------------------------

As cases in Texas soar, the governor warned the state may return to lockdown.

Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas signaled on Friday that he may have to impose a new economic “lockdown” if the state is unable to reverse the record-setting caseloads and hospitalizations that have made Texas a leading U.S. hot spot in the pandemic.

In an interview with KLBK-TV in Lubbock, Mr. Abbott, a Republican, bluntly predicted that “things will get worse” and said that he may be forced to take steps even more drastic than the statewide face-mask [...]

In an effort to blunt the impact on Texas health facilities, the U.S. government has begun deploying federal medical assistance teams to hospitals, some of which have been pushed to capacity levels and beyond.

“They’re critically needed,” said Mayor Ron Nirenberg of San Antonio, which is receiving assistance from both state and federal teams brought in to bolster hospital staffs. Other teams are being assigned to Austin, Dallas and McAllen as well as to smaller rural cities, Mr. Nirenberg said.

In Florida on Friday, officials announced 11,433 new cases, nearing the single-day record it reported July 4. The state also reported 93 new deaths, a day after setting its single-day record with 120. In Miami-Dade County, data reported on Thursday showed that 33.5 percent of virus tests had come back positive; on Friday, it was reported at 27.8 percent. The county has indicated that it aims to be at or below 10 percent.[...]
---------------------------------------

Atlanta officials want people to stay home again, but Georgia’s governor says that’s only a “guidance.”

As Georgia hit a record for cases, Atlanta officials said Friday that they were preparing to shift back to “phase one” guidelines that call for residents to largely stay at home.

The move comes as Georgia reported more than 4,000 new confirmed cases, its largest single-day increase so far. The majority of the state’s cases have been concentrated in the counties making up the Atlanta metropolitan area.[...]
---------------------------------------------------

Ohio and other states that had been making progress see the virus coming back.

The virus is surging in some states that had been making progress after battling earlier outbreaks: On Friday, Ohio reported 1,525 new cases, exceeding the previous single-day record it had set back in April.[...]
------------------------------------------

Cases in the U.S. military have more than doubled in one month.

In one month, cases in the U.S. military have more than doubled, according to Pentagon data, a disturbing surge that mirrors a similar trend seen across the country.[...]
------------------------------------------------

Focuspuller wrote:

Happy to explain.

YOU, as a business owner with employees, aka other people who are NOT you, decide that in YOUR business interest, you remain open and require your employees (other people) to return to your business, exposing them to possible infection or death, along with THEIR families (other people), and THEIR friends and THEIR families (more other people). YOU have decided that the collateral damage to your employees (other people) is, in YOUR opinion, worth the cost.YOU have decided the risks are balanced. Your employees have no choice.

And maybe if the BILLIONS going to friends and cronies of the president, went to the ordinary people and small businesses it was intended for, the economic PAIN you are so concerned about wouldn't be such an excuse for not doing all that is necessary to end the pandemic, which is THE ONE THING that will get the economy working again, not accepting death and sickness as the price of doing business.

Question for you: When it became obvious the pandemic was a real thing and the government response was incompetent to nonexistent, were you urging a better response, or were you downplaying the threat, and only now complaining about the damage to the economy brought on by the anemic response?

slavery is illegal in most of the world.

yes, an employer can 'require' an employee to return, and an employee can refuse. that's what "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" means.

https://www.honynews.com/live-updates-e … states-13/
"A man and woman were arrested Wednesday in Yuma, Ariz., after police said they refused to wear masks inside a local Walmart store and coughed on employees ...."

"Individuals in several incidents have weaponized the awareness that coughing is an effective way to spread the virus and intentionally coughed on others to apparently retaliate against and intimidate them. A woman in San Jose, Calif., coughed on a baby; a man in New Jersey intentionally coughed on an employee of a Wegmans store; and a Pennsylvania man coughed at a senior citizen wearing a mask."

"The Justice Department addressed such scenarios in a March 24 memo to law enforcement. It advised that the coronavirus “appears to meet the statutory definition of a ‘biological agent’” and said attempts to intentionally spread it to others can be prosecuted."

DCurtis wrote:
[...]
that's what "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" means.

As long as you clearly understand the direct line between that "philosophy" and the real mess (COVID-19 wise) that the U.S. is in by every objective number and statistic that's currently available when compared to the rest of the world.  Plus how the numbers and trends in the U.S. show that, unlike most places, it's only getting much, much worse.

In that case, then there's really not much else to say.  You have your beliefs, and that's that.

Now if you want to dispute all of the scientific facts, U.S. numbers and trends, then that's a different story...

LightDreams wrote:

DCurtis, I can sympathize. When your region, or country, gets hit with COVID-19, you're in a "no win" situation, and people will suffer.

The question is, what approach will get you through it in the shortest period possible, with the least amount of (overall) damage and pain?

Different countries and regions have tried different approaches and we have lots of examples to learn from.  Those that hit COVID-19 early and hard, came through it in the shortest amount of time and with the fewest casualties (at least for the first wave).   In areas where they simply tried to ignore it, it just got worse, and worse, and worse.  Becoming a far bigger problem than it ever was to begin with.  In those cases, it doesn't matter if the economy is officially "open for business", once it gets so bad people stop buying and lots of people end up out of work.  In Brazil, on top of the crazy high COVID rates, they now have almost a 50% unemployment rate.  That's no good for anybody.

So I'll repeat.  What approach will get you through it in the shortest period of time with the least overall pain / damage?

the population of the US is about 328,239,523, and has had about 3,291,786 COVID-19 - that is about 1%. the population of Mexico is about 128,649,565, and has had about 289,174 COVID-19 - that is much less than 1%. while there has been a lockdown of sorts in Mexico, it is much more relaxed than in the US.

my point is this - yes, the COVID-19 kills people, but the lockdowns also kill people. suicides go up, domestic violence increases, people forgo needed medical care, drug and alcohol use goes up. and, people should be free to assess the risk for themselves. if you want to lockdown - fine. but, allow the people who do not to get back to their lives.

how many people need to die because you are afraid of COVID-19?

DCurtis wrote:
slavery is illegal in most of the world.

yes, an employer can 'require' an employee to return, and an employee can refuse. that's what "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" means.

Um, no.

Ever hear of OSHA?

"Under federal law, you are entitled to a safe workplace. Your employer must provide a workplace free of known health and safety hazards. If you have concerns, you have the right to speak up about them without fear of retaliation."

"It is illegal for an employer to fire, demote, transfer or otherwise retaliate against a worker for using their rights under the law."

https://www.osha.gov/workers/

DCurtis wrote:
slavery is illegal in most of the world.

And avarice isn't.

Refuse work and you lose unemployment benefits, depending how backward your state is.

Answer the question.

DCurtis wrote:
how many people need to die because you are afraid of COVID-19?

How many people need to die because you aren't?

DCurtis wrote:
my point is this - yes, the COVID-19 kills people, but the lockdowns also kill people. suicides go up, domestic violence increases, people forgo needed medical care, drug and alcohol use goes up. and, people should be free to assess the risk for themselves. if you want to lockdown - fine. but, allow the people who do not to get back to their lives.

how many people need to die because you are afraid of COVID-19?

Don't you dare compare the suspected increased suicide death rate from the pressure of COVID-19 to the 130,000 that have been killed by COVID-19 in the last 3 months in the U.S...

Be warned, of the many studies based on past major prolonged (economic and other) crisis, the actual increase in suicides has been nowhere even remotely close to these kind of COVID-19 deaths.  Don't rely on someone's "talking points" that they made up off the top of their head without checking the facts first.  An increase? Yes.  A significant increase even remotely close to these numbers?  Not even remotely close.

Whatever you do, don't make up facts.  Too many people have tried that, and others have believed them. And look what it's cost the U.S. in lives, over and above how others have fared.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
Examples of the premise that "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary" in action:

that's a private property issue, it would be the same if you invited me into your photo studio, and I took a piss on you best strobe. come to think of it - if Walmart had a policy that you could not be in their store while wearing a mask, and you insisted on wearing one - they could have you arrested.

and here in Mexico, I do wear my symbolic mask while in stores, because the owner expects it. it is not because I think masks are effectual, but because I respect the wishes of the owner.

people are being required to wear masks regardless of their COVID-19 status.

DCurtis wrote:
that's a private property issue, it would be the same if you invited me into your photo studio, and I took a piss on you best strobe. come to think of it - if Walmart had a policy that you could not be in their store while wearing a mask, and you insisted on wearing one - they could have you arrested.

and here in Mexico, I do wear my symbolic mask while in stores, because the owner expects it. it is not because I think masks are effectual, but because I respect the wishes of the owner.

people are being required to wear masks regardless of their COVID-19 status.

You concur that people should wear masks when they are required to.  They should do it out of courtesy.  They should do it out of civic responsibility.  They should do it because it is a requirement on private property.  They should do it because it is the decent thing to do.  Despite all that, these people aren't wearing masks and they are intentionally coughing on other people and you are defending that.  THAT is the result of the attitude of  "Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary"

Your attempt to turn the tables is bogus.  There have been some stories about stores refusing service to people wearing masks and threatening them with arrest or violence if they do wear masks on the premises.  Pretty simple to me.  I will go somewhere else to do business.  But, can they have me arrested if there is a legal order in place for them to require masks?  I think not.  They would be out of business in no time and I doubt their insurance companies are going to cover them in a civil suit if they are flouting the law.

The fallacy with your ridiculous argument is that the people in the story I quoted were breaking the store policy and/or the law and you are supporting that with the "do what is best for you and screw everyone else" policy.  They aren't going to wear a mask and they will intimidate or cough on (ie. assault) anyone that gets in their way.

You may not think that masks are effective, but I know for certain that not wearing one is not effective.  Please feel free to forbid your doctors authorization to conduct a surgery on you unless they agree to do it without masks or gloves.

DCurtis wrote:
and here in Mexico, I do wear my symbolic mask while in stores, because the owner expects it. it is not because I think masks are effectual, but because I respect the wishes of the owner.
.

OHHHHH. So you wear a "symbolic" mask, not in solidarity with your fellow humans, but because storekeepers won't let you in their stores. In other words, your self interest. Would you like a medal?

LightDreams wrote:

As long as you clearly understand the direct line between that "philosophy" and the real mess (COVID-19 wise) that the U.S. is in by every objective number and statistic that's currently available when compared to the rest of the world.  Plus how the numbers and trends in the U.S. show that, unlike most places, it's only getting much, much worse.

In that case, then there's really not much else to say.  You have your beliefs, and that's that.

Now if you want to dispute all of the scientific facts, U.S. numbers and trends, then that's a different story...

if it is only getting worse in the US, compared to other countries. then maybe what the US is doing is not the best way to avoid COVID-19. there was this guy who would beat himself with a baseball bat to the head. he was asked why he did that. "because it feels so good when I stop."

this is what I suspect - the best way for COVID-19 to spread is a dry, cold or cool, low UV light environment (indoor) with stagnant or recycled air. the worst way for it to spread is a humid, hot, outdoor with sunlight and a breeze. social distancing and masks are irrelevant. viral load is important also - the amount of time you spend with a COVID-19+ person.

this is what is so brilliant about the free market: when you allow people to do what is in their best interest - you are testing the theories of a billions of people. when you do what Anthony Fauci tells you to do - you are testing the theory of one person.

Focuspuller wrote:

OHHHHH. So you wear a "symbolic" mask, not in solidarity with your fellow humans, but because storekeepers won't let you in their stores. In other words, your self interest. Would you like a medal?

what does "solidarity with your fellow humans" mean? what do you mean when you say that?

DCurtis wrote:
this is what is so brilliant about the free market: when you allow people to do what is in their best interest - you are testing the theories of a billions of people. when you do what Anthony Fauci tells you to do - you are testing the theory of one person.

Milton Friedman is grinning from hell.  There is no 'free market' that hasn't been corrupted by greed and malefactors of great wealth. Sure, why listen to an expert like Fauci when you can let 130,000 people and counting DIE while the "free market" figures it out eventually. Tell that to the millions who died of lung cancer addicted to cigarettes about the 'magic" of the free market. Your philosophy is immoral.

DCurtis wrote:
if it is only getting worse in the US, compared to other countries. then maybe what the US is doing is not the best way to avoid COVID-19. there was this guy who would beat himself with a baseball bat to the head. he was asked why he did that. "because it feels so good when I stop."

this is what I suspect - the best way for COVID-19 to spread is a dry, cold or cool, low UV light environment (indoor) with stagnant or recycled air. the worst way for it to spread is a humid, hot, outdoor with sunlight and a breeze. social distancing and masks are irrelevant. viral load is important also - the amount of time you spend with a COVID-19+ person.

this is what is so brilliant about the free market: when you allow people to do what is in their best interest - you are testing the theories of a billions of people. when you do what Anthony Fauci tells you to do - you are testing the theory of one person.

Using the actions of an insane person isn't a good way to justify insane behavior.  But the dude with the bat is only hurting himself.

You seriously think that Fauci is making this shit up in a vacuum?  Every serious infectious disease expert wouldn't say the same thing?  You seriously expect that ditch digger has the same knowledge to back his assertions as an expert on the subject?  I doubt that you will let Fauci tell you how to do photography, why are you telling us that everyone else knows better than Fauci?  Testing the theories of billions of people?  Are they going to publish their data?

I have no problem with you not wearing a mask outside, in the sunlight, in the breeze, when there aren't other people packed in tight around you.   I don't either, but I am starting to because it helps with pollen and dust when I am walking through fields.  But not one of the examples was remotely similar to those circumstances.

You say the US isn't doing something right and it is getting worse, but the areas where it is getting worse are the places where they are doing what you are advocating- everyone for themselves.

We saw this in 1918.  We don't need to wait for the ignorant to tell us what is medically sound.

DCurtis wrote:

what does "solidarity with your fellow humans" mean? what do you mean when you say that?

Common good. Ever hear of it?

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
"Everyone should do what they individually feel necessary to take care of themselves and let everyone else do the same as they feel necessary"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_APqWNVpGmI

This another example of your kind of guy.  Look at that.  He feels threatened.  Look at his arms, his chest, look at how he makes someone back up.  Listen to the demands.  All because of being asked to wear a mask.  On private property.  Good thing it cost him his job.  I hope he gets his assed sued too.

my kind of guy? I have already mentioned that people should respect property rights.

but yeah, there are people with mental health issues whose condition is exasperated with these lockdowns. I actually feel sorry for the guy.

Focuspuller wrote:

Common good. Ever hear of it?

how is what is good for me not good for you? are we that different?

DCurtis wrote:

how is what is good for me not good for you? are we that different?

The mind boggles.