Ebola

[Lathum]

He was a Sierra Leonean citizen and a permanent resident of the United States whose family lives in Maryland; his wife, an American citizen, asked the State Department to evacuate him and agreed to reimburse the government for the cost of the operation.

Do permanent residents pay taxes? If so why should she have to reimburse the government?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Do permanent residents pay taxes? If so why should she have to reimburse the government?

Seems pretty common sense to me. I mean, people who place themselves at risk in something like hiking or climbing or the like are often responsible for the reimbursement of the rescue operation.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Seems pretty common sense to me. I mean, people who place themselves at risk in something like hiking or climbing or the like are often responsible for the reimbursement of the rescue operation.

Trying to save peoples' lives to stop the spread of something that you yourself were ignorantly scared of is a little different than hiking or climbing in a dangerous place. But I'm just pleasantly surprised you didn't call for his execution, or for the plane to Nebraska to be shot down, or for us all to meet him with pitchforks at the airport. (Or maybe you didn't have time before Ebola got him first.)

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Seems pretty common sense to me. I mean, people who place themselves at risk in something like hiking or climbing or the like are often responsible for the reimbursement of the rescue operation.

Apples and oranges.

and that doesn't answer my question.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Apples and oranges. and that doesn't answer my question.

How in the blue hell would a non-citizen's involvement in risky behavior become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

Hell, how would a non-citizen's involvement in ANYTHING become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

How in the blue hell would a non-citizen's involvement in risky behavior become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

Hell, how would a non-citizen's involvement in ANYTHING become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

Nobody's going to raise your taxes. You won't get a bill in the mail. They have a budget. Maybe it would even be a win-win for you if they had to pull a little discretionary money that was designed to help some other person or group of people that you find even less desirable.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

Nobody's going to raise your taxes. You won't get a bill in the mail. They have a budget. Maybe it would even be a win-win for you if they had to pull a little discretionary money that was designed to help some other person or group of people that you find even less desirable.

I have no problem with them underspending their budget (your argument is a great example for zero-based budgeting actually ... but that's a different thread)

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by molson

Nobody's going to raise your taxes. You won't get a bill in the mail. They have a budget. Maybe it would even be a win-win for you if they had to pull a little discretionary money that was designed to help some other person or group of people that you find even less desirable.

Why the fuck would you want to help anyone one without getting something in return? Fucking commie!

[molson]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

Why the fuck would you want to help anyone one without getting something in return? Fucking commie!

Ya, it's difficult to even discuss government and budgets with someone who generally opposes helping humans in all contexts. And I'm very fiscally conservative - but that's because everyone wins with a more efficient government. It's particularly amusing here when you compare and contrast these two types of Christians. The ones, like Dr. Salia, who truly back up their faith by making great sacrifices for the welfare of others - even before the Ebola infection. Then there's the southern U.S. version (not all of them, but too many of them), who are primarily concerned with hating gay people, and have no interest in the welfare of others, and in fact resent it when others help people, especially undesirable people.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

Ya, it's difficult to even discuss government and budgets with someone who generally opposes helping humans in all contexts. And I'm very fiscally conservative - but that's because everyone wins with a more efficient government. It's particularly amusing here when you compare and contrast these two types of Christians. The ones, like Dr. Salia, who truly back up their faith by making great sacrifices for the welfare of others - even before the Ebola infection. Then there's the southern U.S. version (not all of them, but too many of them), who are primarily concerned with hating gay people, and have no interest in the welfare of others, and in fact resent it when others help people, especially undesirable people.

So this was some sort of Christian charity mission now?

Well that explains the reimbursement then, the ACLU would have had a fit.

[molson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

So this was some sort of Christian charity mission now?

Well that explains the reimbursement then, the ACLU would have had a fit.

That's actually a good point. Yes, he was very religious, prayed before every surgery, and went to work in a Christian hospital in Sierra Leone after he was trained through Pan-African Academy of Christian Surgeons, forgoing more lucrative private practice work. I can see that rubbing a lot of people the wrong way if there was any government involvement.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by molson

That's actually a good point. Yes, he was very religious, prayed before every surgery, and went to work in a Christian hospital in Sierra Leone after he was trained through Pan-African Academy of Christian Surgeons, forgoing more lucrative private practice work. I can see that rubbing a lot of people the wrong way if there was any government involvement.

I'm not a Christian and I have no problem with taxpayers footing the bill to bring this guy home.

[Kodos]

+1.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

How in the blue hell would a non-citizen's involvement in risky behavior become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

Hell, how would a non-citizen's involvement in ANYTHING become the responsibility of the taxpayers?

Hence my question if he pays taxes or not as a resident.

Cmon John, your reading comprehension is better than that

[DaddyTorgo]

His wife is a citizen - she pays taxes.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Then there's the southern U.S. version (not all of them, but too many of them), who are primarily concerned with hating gay people, and have no interest in the welfare of others, and in fact resent it when others help people, especially undesirable people.

I'm so old I remember when you'd berate me for saying similar things. Welcome to the pool, the water's fine!

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

His wife is a citizen - she pays taxes.

If he draws a paycheck in the U.S. he pays taxes, too. He also pays sales tax and any other fees that he runs into.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

If he draws a paycheck in the U.S. he pays taxes, too. He also pays sales tax and any other fees that he runs into.

Very good point!

[AlexB]

Ebola is yesterday's news. Bird flu's back headlining today!

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Ebola is yesterday's news. Bird flu's back headlining today!

That's what they want you to think.

[Lathum]

Whatever happened to Ebola ?

[cartman]

I met her in a club down in old Soho
Where you drink champagne and it tastes just like Coca-Cola
C-O-L-A cola
She walked up to me and she asked me to dance
I asked her her name and in a dark brown voice she said Ebola
E-B-O-L-A Ebola

[claphamsa]

lots? we have a significant military presence in Liberia, we are scaling up hospitals to respond, spending 100s of millions on developing vaccines....

[lighthousekeeper]

CDC predicted 1.4 million cases by January 20. At the time that number simply did not seem to pass the sniff test, especially when you looked a little closer at their methodology for determining that value. there was no accounting for disease resistance in survivors, no accounting for population isolation. and just used magical "doubling" tricks. (i.e. since ebola has been underreported in the past, we're just going to double our numbers going forward indefinitely.) It just comes across like another case of a government agency with palm extended seizing the opportunity to ask for budget increase and willing to say what it takes to secure the funding. I could be totally wrong, but it just comes across that way. Just another WMD.

"1.4 million, *if* you don't give us the dough." perfect strategy. months down the road when the numbers don't match those highly inflated numbers, it's so easy to retort "see, you funded us and look - our effort saved 1.39 million lives!"

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Whatever happened to Ebola ?

It's close to being wiped out in Liberia. Other than that it looks like not much is going to happen until the eminent explosion of the disease that's bound to occur in the US.

[molson]

Interesting to see both this and the global warming thread bumped at the same time. I see a lot of parallels between the global warming deniers and the Ebola panickers. Even aside from just the fact that both groups are filled with morons whose opinions are based on emotion and politics and not science or reality.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

CDC predicted 1.4 million cases by January 20. At the time that number simply did not seem to pass the sniff test, especially when you looked a little closer at their methodology for determining that value. there was no accounting for disease resistance in survivors, no accounting for population isolation. and just used magical "doubling" tricks. (i.e. since ebola has been underreported in the past, we're just going to double our numbers going forward indefinitely.) It just comes across like another case of a government agency with palm extended seizing the opportunity to ask for budget increase and willing to say what it takes to secure the funding. I could be totally wrong, but it just comes across that way. Just another WMD.

"1.4 million, *if* you don't give us the dough." perfect strategy. months down the road when the numbers don't match those highly inflated numbers, it's so easy to retort "see, you funded us and look - our effort saved 1.39 million lives!"

...or for reference...

Ebola Virus Outbreak 2014: 1.4 Million Cases Predicted By January, CDC Says

There could be 1.4 million cases of the Ebola virus by the beginning of next year if the epidemic stays on its current course, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned in a worst-case scenario outlined in a report released Tuesday. The best-case scenario would be that the outbreak will have “almost ended” in Liberia and Sierra Leone by Jan. 20.

Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the CDC, was optimistic that the more dire model wouldn’t become a reality. The forecasts didn’t have any projections for Guinea, which is among the three countries where the West African Ebola outbreak is concentrated. “My gut feeling is, the actions we’re taking now are going to make that worst-case scenario not come to pass,” Frieden said in an interview with the New York Times. “But it is important to understand that it could happen.”

Not even close to what you just suggested (CDC "predicted" 1.4m)...just best and worst case scenarios...which is actually there job, I would imagine. Does sound like the logic being used with regard to Global Warming though.

[lighthousekeeper]

OK, you are correct regarding that semantic distinction. It's an important one. But I don't think that necessarily undermines my original points. (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy)

But I love how even the title of your cited reference exactly matches my semantics, and yet my suggestion is 'not even close'. It illustrates a possible irresponsibility on CDC's part for how they got their message out. It should not have been a surprise that, based on how they presented their findings that it would be reinterpreted my most. Especially in the media, and most likely by lawmakers as well.


But also...I dunno, I think an agency with the supposed collective scientific brainpower of the CDC should feel a little ashamed if the best answer they could provide is 'eh somewhere between 0 and 1.3 million new cases'.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

But I love how even the title of your cited reference exactly matches my semantics, and yet my suggestion is 'not even close'.

Hey! You just did it again! I defended 'not even close' with a whole bunch of words.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

Interesting to see both this and the global warming thread bumped at the same time. I see a lot of parallels between the global warming deniers and the Ebola panickers. Even aside from just the fact that both groups are filled with morons whose opinions are based on emotion and politics and not science or reality.

Or one could say there are posters like myself who felt that most Ebola and Global Warming fears are overblown, and while both are worthy of looking at and trying to fix, neither is the imminent threat necessating drastic societal changes its more ardent proponents swore it was. But keep painting with that broad brush!

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

OK, you are correct regarding that semantic distinction. It's an important one. But I don't think that necessarily undermines my original points. (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy)

But I love how even the title of your cited reference exactly matches my semantics, and yet my suggestion is 'not even close'. It illustrates a possible irresponsibility on CDC's part for how they got their message out. It should not have been a surprise that, based on how they presented their findings that it would be reinterpreted my most. Especially in the media, and most likely by lawmakers as well.


But also...I dunno, I think an agency with the supposed collective scientific brainpower of the CDC should feel a little ashamed if the best answer they could provide is 'eh somewhere between 0 and 1.3 million new cases'.

Blame the media's coverage, not the CDC on that. I never bothered to read the CDC report, but even the short excerpt Dutch posted has the CDC director saying it's unlikely the worst-case scenario will come to pass. (While supporting your point a little in that the CDC wasn't above using this crisis to get any extra money. Or more likely, politicking to keel their share of the pie whenever the next round of budgeting comes up.)

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

But also...I dunno, I think an agency with the supposed collective scientific brainpower of the CDC should feel a little ashamed if the best answer they could provide is 'eh somewhere between 0 and 1.3 million new cases'.

That's not at all what happened. They ran a number of scenarios based on different responses and came up with infection numbers for different scenarios. The don't have control over how the world responds, so they looked at different possibilities.

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Blame the media's coverage, not the CDC on that. I never bothered to read the CDC report, but even the short excerpt Dutch posted has the CDC director saying it's unlikely the worst-case scenario will come to pass. (While supporting your point a little in that the CDC wasn't above using this crisis to get any extra money. Or more likely, politicking to keel their share of the pie whenever the next round of budgeting comes up.)

it wasnt the media...it was the Tea Baggers!

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by rowech

This is going to explode in the USA very soon. People are so stupid. Why would she travel to a different city? Just dumb beyond dumb.

still waiting.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Lathum

still waiting.

Looks like I was wrong. Not sure if it was you or somebody else but I made a donation to Doctors Without Borders this morning.

[larrymcg421]

Is it safe to go bowling yet?

[flounder]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Is it safe to go bowling yet?

Is it ever?

[cartman]

As long as Pumpy is rolling, no.