COVID-19 - Wuhan Coronavirus (a non-political thread, see pg. 36 #1778)

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

There is a point at which it becomes reality. I.e., a whole lot of people died of malnutrition and related conditions in the Great Depression.

Actually, it is not that cut and dry. Can't speak to malnutrition specifically, but in the spirit of weighing things up as is done with Covid vs 'Cure' (being worse than the disease): Health in general and on a national level (there's differences between urban and rural areas, though) did not decline as much as people might assume based on 'common sense':

Life and death during the Great Depression | PNAS

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0324202055.htm

The 2nd is kinda more sceptical, but even it concludes that it isn't cut and dry at all.

I guess one explanation would be that while there was certainly more people reliant on help, it was also much more freely given and people were a lot more mindfull of ressources and taking risks both physically and in terms of lifestyle (just spitballing !)
Maybe enough people gave up smoking to make a difference (plus, Prohibition for all it's flaws was in effect).

Essentially suicides went up, accidental deaths went down (only looking at car accidents here, but there's other studies looking at accidents in general), everything else stayed surprisingly stable both short and longterm. Life expectancy actually went up significatly more during the great Depression than in the years preceding it or those after it.

Now, one problem is that i don't see the US in a position or willing to put in the same 'community effort' as during the great depression. People are still worried about the wrong or undeserving people getting free money or if that won't result in them not wanting to work.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

(You're carrying an extra 0 there... 150/3000 would be 5% mortality, not .5.)

I'm also not really sure where this analogy conflated the number of people I work with the number of people I socialize with... suffice it to say most of my closest friends do not work with me, and I certainly do not think I have 3000 close friends

But this also isn't a choice I want to force on others. I have friends who are young & single & are quarantining hardcore, we've all seen plenty of people who are older and more at risk and very cavalier about this, all the polls & common sense say that many people will still choose and be able to maintain extreme social distancing if that's their choice. (Especially if they have a job they can work remotely, which is pretty common among white collar people at this point.) Tests that show how wide spread exposure actually has been could change my point of view (if it's only 5% of people, obviously more extreme measures are good, but if it's anything like the higher estimates - and Charlotte's person in charge said exposure could already be as high as 25-75% (which seems wildly high to me, but I guess I'm rooting for it) - then yeah we should definitely be relaxing restrictions on many things while still keeping the sensible ones like letting as many people as possible work from home, drastically cutting back travel, holding off on tightly packed concerts, sporting events, or things that bring together people from many different parts of the country so outbreaks stay localized. But to get back to Ben's hypothetical, as long as we're not at risk of overwhelming the health care system (and there's no miracle vaccine timeline), more people having been exposed is actually a good thing, and at some point shouldn't those people who have antibodies at least be allowed to walk around without a mask on in public? It's back to my theory that a positive anti-gen test could be a reverse Scarlet Letter ("No, see, I can't be infected, you can actually talk to meeeeee )

I realized the next morning that my math was an order of magnitude off, but I stand by the idea. I don't know 3000 people either, but there may be 3000 in the greater community that are 2-3 steps removed from me (actually, I work in a pretty large building so between that and school, it's probably more). So "3000 friends" really represents that. And, that group is not all under 40, so the death rate wouldn't realistically be just .5% anyway. I'm curious for instance how many fatalities we see out of the Smithfield plant. There's what, 600 confirmed cases there now? Betting there are going to be more than three fatalities.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by RendeR

I think Gary, and by proxy all those protesters in Michigan are really panicky and want their hand held.

Their businesses will not die. They can and will return.

People Die and they can't be brought back.

Yes some of the restrictions may seem frivolous, but you know what? no matter how frivolous they SEEM, they are still keeping people from infecting other people. And thats all that this is about. Slowing this virus down until we can SAFELY get ours lives back.

No one is overstepping in this country. other countries are literally jailing people for walking the streets without very specific reasons (groceries are not specific enough in say, Italy)

I've done a grocery run and a painting supply run in the last 2 weeks. I can god damned guarentee you that Buffalo is going to look very much like NYC before we're done because people seem to believe the shut down doesn't mean "them" or shouldn't stop "them" from doing what they want to do.

Shut up, stay home and stop assuming YOUR life or a business is more important than PEOPLE. (royal Your)

"The cure can't be worse than the disease" is literally a worthless Right side pissing point, it is not VALID in this situation.

You don't get to barter with a disease. You don't get to play "balance the scales" with a pandemic. You take every possible precaution and you SURVIVE IT. You don't "learn to live with acceptable losses" it isn't a war, it isn't a sprint, this is a marathon to get the MOST people through it alive.

Fuck the economy in the short term.

Long term it WILL revive on its own.

Sorry I'm not showing confidence or giving hope (aka blowing smoke up your ass), I'm trying to be honest without using a lot of terms I feel are more fitting to describe this lunacy of re-opening anything anytime soon.

You're saying that you went for groceries and paint, saw people out and are guaranteeing Buffalo is going to end up like NYC (so in otherwords Buffalo is going to have more deaths than the next dozen worse STATES combined) and I'm the one who is panicking? If you are telling people to stay home why are you out buying paint? What was so essential to paint that you went out and risked everyone's life for? Why didn't you have groceries delivered? How do you know you were not a carrier that passed it onto a cashier that lives at home who passed it onto their parents who one of now could be in a hospital thanks to you? Why was your need to go out for stuff more important than all the people you could have impacted?

You clearly felt it was ok to make a grocery and paint supply run. How is that different than any of the other people you are criticizing for being out? I guess the shutdown didn't mean "you" huh?

Which one of us sounds like panic again?

I have some shocking news for you - people die everyday. It's tragic that people are dying from this virus but is it more tragic than if they died of heart disease, cancer or something else? This has nothing to do with "sacrificing human life for business" - a business isn't important - it's the people who own the business and work for the business that are important. If you are financially ruined then that business dies and with it dies opportunities for the owner as well as EVERY PERSON who works for it because if those people had the resources to own and run a business they would be doing so.

This virus is not going away today, tomorrow or maybe ever. There is no guarantee a cure or vaccine will come along and even then it may continue to exist and prove fatal whether you catch it today or five years from now.

There is no possible way we can prevent all suffering and loss here either from death from the virus or financial devastation and ruin for living people who still need to go on living. We were told to stay at home to flatten the curve. To make sure that people would not be dying in hospital waiting rooms because there would be no beds. Our hospitals are not overrun and in fact they set up a temporary hospital at the old Cobo Hall and decided they don't need it. Sounds like the stay at home plan accomplished what it set out to do.

This is not a "worthless right side pissing point" - tell me what are you going to do with the millions of people who will have mental illness, addictions, sickness and disease from malnutrition, lack of ability to pay for medicine, fear of going to the doctor or hospital, inability to have procedures done in a hospital, increases in domestic abuse, lack of education for children, lack of financial resources to pay for basic necessities including a place to live? What will you do about the suicides from these things? The riots and violence and pillaging from this? The deaths or otherwise lifelong reductions in quality of life? What is your plan for those millions and millions of people if we continue to just shut down everything for months and months?

The fact is that everything right now points to that most people who get this virus will recover in a short period of time if they feel any impact at all. The people who suffer from the above will NOT recover in a short period of time IF AT ALL and just like we want to prevent as many people as possible from suffering from the virus I think we ALSO (not instead) should try to prevent as much of the latter suffering as well. Wanting that does not diminish or ignore that this virus is deadly for a small percentage of the population nor does it equate sacrificing those people in the name of almighty evil corporate republican business. People who have serious underlying health issues SHOULD CONTINUE to stay at home and avoid the public while we buy as much time as possible looking for a cure or vaccine that works. We can be SMART and use scientific data about what people can and should be doing now instead of being paralyzed by fear.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

I have no idea what you're getting after but it doesn't change the fact that the government here is forcing people to stay at home and yet failing miserably (as usual) to do anything to support them when they can't even get on the website for unemployment. That is a today problem - has nothing to do with whoever was in charge in years past.

This isn't a R or D problem - the same problem exists in other states and its exactly why people are getting tired of being told to stay at home. Stay at home is fine if the government is paying your bills - its paid vacation for everyone. However when you haven't had a check in six weeks and can't even log on to the unemployment website can't say I'm surprised people are getting restless and tired of waiting on the government.

What I was getting after is that the R side isn't interested in making things like unemployment easy to get - they WANT it to be a shitshow, they don't want people getting "free" money. They want roadblocks. The system is working as designed. You can't change that overnight (and still being in control of the legislature, they probably don't want to anyway).

[miami_fan]

Let’s give it a shot. Time to prove Floridians can be responsible and show it was the out of towners that were the problem last month.

North Florida beaches among 1st to reopen since closures

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

I have some shocking news for you - people die everyday.

Can you tell this to the folks who go ape shit if a white girl gets killed by someone with darker skin? k thx

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by Radii

I just hope we can all come together in some way to support those in Michigan who are only allowed to reside in one of their multiple homes right now. Truly the greatest example of the devastating effect this pandemic is having on the most unfortunate among us.

Tell me this was just a failed attempt at humor.

It's not about those who are rich and have multiple houses - in fact summer houses up north here are not expensive and many average working class people own them because they are great spots for hunting or fishing or just relaxing in the wilderness. People can get a cabin for a very reasonable price because its just a place out in the woods that you can't even go to during winter in some cases.

It is the abject stupidity that someone who lives in Michigan cannot travel to their summer house up north yet someone from NYC would be able to do just that. Tell me how that makes sense? (That and that the government can try and ban you from your own property)

But go ahead and ignore the point that our governor is now doing things just haphazardly if you can try and spin it as OMG rich people want to sacrifice all the rest of us at the almighty altar of the stock market.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

What I was getting after is that the R side isn't interested in making things like unemployment easy to get - they WANT it to be a shitshow, they don't want people getting "free" money. They want roadblocks. The system is working as designed. You can't change that overnight (and still being in control of the legislature, they probably don't want to anyway).

We have a D governor (who wants to be VP and not governor) - maybe she should spend more time working on that and less time promoting herself on cable news channels. I mean she's in charge - if it's going wrong it is clearly her fault right or does that only apply if a R is in charge?

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Can you tell this to the folks who go ape shit if a white girl gets killed by someone with darker skin? k thx

I think it's sad and tragic if anyone is murdered, don't you?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

We have a D governor (who wants to be VP and not governor) - maybe she should spend more time working on that and less time promoting herself on cable news channels. I mean she's in charge - if it's going wrong it is clearly her fault right or does that only apply if a R is in charge?

Well she is a governor and not king. She can't pass legislation at will.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Can you tell this to the folks who go ape shit if a white girl gets killed by someone with darker skin? k thx

Or you know the folks who keep bringing up 9/11 to do heinous shit.

[panerd]

I guess I am lost on when this plan went from flattening the curve to preventing every single COVID death? Please correct me where I am wrong on this line of thinking...

* Person A has a bad immune system or whatever unknown factor goes into dying from COVID. If they got it on March 19th and died how would they not die if they instead get this disease July 19th?

* No place in the United States outside of possibly NYC (maybe not even NYC?) ever encountered the shortage of ICU beds and respirators that Italy did so the curve flattening worked.

When did the plan change? Honest question because it seems as though now its now become a false dichotomy between the saving the economy vs saving lives but I never thought that was the point of any of this. Wasn't the point to avoid hospitals being overwhelmed? How would the 35K death number be any different besides going back in a time machine and doing something different in January? I guess I just don't see how this got so polarizing? I mean I shouldn't be surprised it got polarized but I don't get how this is now a red state/blue state or whatever the hell that even means.

You flatten the curve, slowly reopen with social distancing, and then flatten the curve again if needed right?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by panerd

You flatten the curve, slowly reopen with social distancing, and then flatten the curve again if needed right?

It's harder to put the genie back into the bottle. The fear with NYC is that it may be the first harbinger of what may happen in other places. Now NYC is denser than everywhere else, but the spread and death rate was far higher than expected. I think a lot of Governors are being extra cautious because they don't want to see NYC come to them - because once that starts its hard to contain.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

Which one of us sounds like panic again?

Still you, by a large margin.

I have some shocking news for you - people die everyday. It's tragic that people are dying from this virus but is it more tragic than if they died of heart disease, cancer or something else?

There is a big difference. You don't "catch" heart disease or cancer. In some respects, many can control if you catch high blood pressure or diabetes. There is already a massive effort to cure cancer.

You are not in control of how or when you catch Covid-19 unless you just never leave your house again. And most agree that approach is not feasible. HOWEVER, if you can mitigate loss of life by taking action, don't you agree that you should take that action? I agree that the "cure can't be worse than the disease". But this idea that a depression will cause hundreds of thousands of deaths is just not correct.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...ates-46713514/

People's lives financially will be hurt short-term. But as I said before, it seems to me that society's #1 job is to implement policy that keeps people alive. That has to be job 1 right now, period.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It's harder to put the genie back into the bottle. The fear with NYC is that it may be the first harbinger of what may happen in other places. Now NYC is denser than everywhere else, but the spread and death rate was far higher than expected. I think a lot of Governors are being extra cautious because they don't want to see NYC come to them - because once that starts its hard to contain.

It's good to be cautious. But it would be interesting to live in a country where some states are extending lock-downs possibly 2+ years until a vaccine is fully deployed (unless the vaccine doesn't work all the time, then a longer lockdown I guess), while other states are going to do what they're planning to do in Europe - gradually re-entry, mandate precautions in opened facets of society, monitor the data, test.

Because I have the same confusion as panerd. The rhetoric seems to have switched to a sentiment of amending nothing about the stay-at-home orders until it is safe for everyone. That seems like a fantasy.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

You're saying that you went for groceries and paint, saw people out and are guaranteeing Buffalo is going to end up like NYC (so in otherwords Buffalo is going to have more deaths than the next dozen worse STATES combined) and I'm the one who is panicking? If you are telling people to stay home why are you out buying paint? What was so essential to paint that you went out and risked everyone's life for? Why didn't you have groceries delivered? How do you know you were not a carrier that passed it onto a cashier that lives at home who passed it onto their parents who one of now could be in a hospital thanks to you? Why was your need to go out for stuff more important than all the people you could have impacted?

You clearly felt it was ok to make a grocery and paint supply run. How is that different than any of the other people you are criticizing for being out? I guess the shutdown didn't mean "you" huh?

Which one of us sounds like panic again?

Haha, the paint thing caught my eye too. Reminds me of neighborhood social media posts complaining about people who are Home Depot for the wrong reasons, posted by people who are also there, but for the right things. Paint I guess.

The funny thing is, nobody here is saying that the precautions and orders aren't necessary and haven't slowed this down. But all it takes is acknowledging the awesome cost of that, and to worry about its broader impact, and consider what governments can do to address and balance that risk, and you're a right-wing nutjob now. Or even a racist I guess.

You can care about both things.

It's a fantasy that we're going to "knock this out" with some Netflix binging. I worry that people who this won't be economically devastating for (which is probably most of this board), are making these pronouncements and insults from a very comfortable place, insulated from reality and where we're going. If they're going to tell me I don't care about people dying, then I'm going to tell them that they don't care about the costs to peoples' livelihoods as long as they get theirs. I don't think that's true, but if the former is fair game, the latter is too. If we're only allowed to care about one aspect of this and not two or more.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It's harder to put the genie back into the bottle. The fear with NYC is that it may be the first harbinger of what may happen in other places. Now NYC is denser than everywhere else, but the spread and death rate was far higher than expected. I think a lot of Governors are being extra cautious because they don't want to see NYC come to them - because once that starts its hard to contain.

Yeah I think I get that, I live in St. Louis County which isn't New York or New Orleans or Detroit but also definitely is seeing it's fair share of devastation and is currently under a stay at home order. The County Executive just extended the order until May. All of this seems to go along with my original post your responded to.

How then does it become...
Side A: We need to reopen now! (Doesn't make sense we haven't flattened the curve yet)
Side B: You are killing people! (Also doesn't make sense. There is no cure, no vaccine, and no hospital shortage yet. Every person that died would have died 2 months ago, in 2 months)

When the graph of deaths however goes down then it can no longer be about fear of some people dying because that was never what this was about to begin with right? I'm not sure 75% of the people are following what flattening the curve means.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by panerd

You flatten the curve, slowly reopen with social distancing, and then flatten the curve again if needed right?

Yeah, I think you're right. I don't think the goal is to prevent every single death. I think the real debate is when is the right time to open up right now, and to me that is a real tough question. The answers are different in different places due to population density and infection rates, etc.

I will go back to Gary's point and say that the Michigan governor deserves some criticism. I think the NY people deserve some criticism. Trump deserves some criticism. I love how it has been handled in Ohio, California, and Washington. There are places for criticism that is not a red/blue thing.

[ISiddiqui]

Also, I don't know if it was mentioned but I just saw that US deaths yesterday was reported as 4,951, which is much higher than the previous high of 2,751 (which was Wednesday)

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by molson

The funny thing is, nobody here is saying that the precautions and orders aren't necessary and haven't slowed this down. But all it takes is acknowledging the awesome cost of that, and to worry about its broader impact, and consider what governments can do to address and balance that risk, and you're a right-wing nutjob now. Or even a racist I guess.

That's just silly. Gary is literally saying the recent orders from Gov. Whitmer aren't necessary.

And plenty of people can acknowledge the awesome cost of what is going and worry about the impact and how to balance that without being called 'nutjobs'. It's all over the Mental Health thread, for one. I'm having a civil discussion with panerd about it right now.

This is just gaslighting nonsense IMO.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yeah I think I get that, I live in St. Louis County which isn't New York or New Orleans or Detroit but also definitely is seeing it's fair share of devastation and is currently under a stay at home order. The County Executive just extended the order until May. All of this seems to go along with my original post your responded to.

How then does it become...
Side A: We need to reopen now! (Doesn't make sense we haven't flattened the curve yet)
Side B: You are killing people! (Also doesn't make sense. There is no cure, no vaccine, and no hospital shortage yet. Every person that died would have died 2 months ago, in 2 months)

When the graph of deaths however goes down then it can no longer be about fear of some people dying because that was never what this was about to begin with right? I'm not sure 75% of the people are following what flattening the curve means.

There are definitely Side A and Side B people, but I think most Governors (Republican as well as Democrat - Gov. DeWine of OH and Gov. Hogan of Maryland have very strict SAH orders as well), aren't exactly saying Side B. But they are saying if you don't adhere to staying at home, we may indeed have a ventilator/hospital shortage. Because they've seen what has happened in NYC and in New Jersey (which had to receive shipments of ventilators from California).

And therefore those people who died now may not die in 2 months because they have ventilators that they may not have if things are loosened.

Though I think some Side B people get waaay too dramatic to try to get people to adhere to staying at home because they may not understand what flattening the curve means (allowing hospitals to treat those who need intensive care).

I think, as I said earlier, NYC has really scared the shit out of a lot of Governors. Atlanta as well ran out of ICU beds earlier this month (hopefully the SAH has opened some up).

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That's just silly. Gary is literally saying the recent orders from Gov. Whitmer aren't necessary.

Her recent orders are not necessary.

Person A lives in Michigan - cannot travel to cottage up north.

Person B lives in NYC - can travel to cottage in northern part of Michigan.

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


You can go to Home Depot and buy plumbing items. But you cannot go to the outdoor section of the store to buy plants.

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


You can go out with someone on a rowboat to fish in a lake

You cannot go out with someone on a boat with a motor to fish in a lake

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


I'm 100% serious - please enlighten me on why these orders make sense and help stop the spread of COVID-19 and are not just haphazard orders by someone who really doesn't know what she is doing.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That's just silly. Gary is literally saying the recent orders from Gov. Whitmer aren't necessary.

And plenty of people can acknowledge the awesome cost of what is going and worry about the impact and how to balance that without being called 'nutjobs'. It's all over the Mental Health thread, for one. I'm having a civil discussion with panerd about it right now.

This is just gaslighting nonsense IMO.

I've read in this thread that a concern for the broader impacts of this is a fake right-wing talking point, and that the only people who are concerned about opening the economy at some point are rich people who won't be impacted by the dangers.

Hey, but I hope you're right. But when I see any post about the strategies and policies involving with re-opening portions of the economy, there is a lot of pushback to that. But I don't think we mean opening things TOMORROW. I sure don't. So when people respond with broad defiance to that concept being expressed at all, in any timeline, it feels like they're saying we should never open up, or not until a vaccine is fully deployed, or, that they have the belief that if we just stay inside for some period of time everything will go away on its own, or that they're personally financially comfortable so we shouldn't have concerns about the broader impacts. Maybe they don't mean that either, but, if they don't, I'm not even sure what they're disagreeing about.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Also, I don't know if it was mentioned but I just saw that US deaths yesterday was reported as 4,951, which is much higher than the previous high of 2,751 (which was Wednesday)

My one source, Worldmeters, had 2174 for yesterday.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Butter

Yeah, I think you're right. I don't think the goal is to prevent every single death. I think the real debate is when is the right time to open up right now, and to me that is a real tough question. The answers are different in different places due to population density and infection rates, etc.

From an epidemioloy Standpoint the right time to start opening things is when the Reproductive rate (how many people one person statistically spreads it to) is below 1 , meaning cases are reducing, and the current active cases is at a number where you think this + hidden spread (which you need to guess based on antibody studies and Reading between the numbers) is manageable with the infrastructure you have available (tests, Health care).


Then you open with the goal of not going above a level where you can keep it close to that. Germany is now solidly under 1 at 0.7 and has very good diagnostic and about the highest per capita hospital capacity (including intensive care and personell as well). And still experts are torn of wether even a soft reopening isn't 2 weeks too soon.

The difference between 1,2 and 1.6 f.e is already massive. Say you start with 500k undetected infected still left and after reopening the rate goes from 0.9 to either 1.2/1.6. So take that 500k x1.2/1.6 multiple times. Do it 5 times and you are at 1.25 mio (or 750k new Infections) vs 5.25 mio.
For Germany 1.2 is already about where the current projections have the healthcare system completely collapsing in mid july !

It is not possible to achieve Herd Immunity within even 4-5 years without completely obliterating the health care system for essentially the entire time or stop treating Covid. The goal is never to allow such a situation and that is tougher than people realize. Early Reproduction rate for Wuhan is thought to be 5+, for other countries pre social distancing 2.5 - 3 (already knowing it is a new disease helped a lot simply by having people quarantined etc).

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

Her recent orders are not necessary.

Person A lives in Michigan - cannot travel to cottage up north.

Person B lives in NYC - can travel to cottage in northern part of Michigan.

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


You can go to Home Depot and buy plumbing items. But you cannot go to the outdoor section of the store to buy plants.

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


You can go out with someone on a rowboat to fish in a lake

You cannot go out with someone on a boat with a motor to fish in a lake

That stops the spread of COVID-19 how?


I'm 100% serious - please enlighten me on why these orders make sense and help stop the spread of COVID-19 and are not just haphazard orders by someone who really doesn't know what she is doing.

The first one is easy to explain. A Governor can restrict people in her state from going from one location to another but cannot Constitutionally prevent people from other states from entering her state. It's part of the Privileges and Immunities Clause (edit: had the wrong clause initially).

Secondly, perhaps it has been determined that plumbing is essential (if your plumbing ain't working that's an emergency) while planting is not. I don't know the reasoning, but I do know Michigan isn't the only state that has put a kibosh on planting supplies. Perhaps the health experts have a reason there (likely non-essential). Of course Home Depot isn't the only place that sells planting materials - there are dedicated stores to do that.

I've read that some folks were abusing the order on motor boats - namely the ones with bigger motor boats having parties on the boat. I know that happened in Florida. So perhaps the idea that non-motor boats tend to be smaller factored into that. Perhaps the next step should be to allow motor boats but only under a certain size.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

My one source, Worldmeters, had 2174 for yesterday.

Interesting. I got my number from the Washington Post. Wonder where they got their number... they are saying total deaths of 33,318. What does Worldmeters say?

Though it may be due to NYC reclassifying some deaths of people suspected of COVID but not tested (considering that the non-COVID death rate in NYC was far higher than usual, they probably realized they were severely undercounting)

[PilotMan]

35,353 in psuedo real time.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by molson

Hey, but I hope you're right. But when I see any post about the strategies and policies involving with re-opening portions of the economy, there is a lot of pushback to that. But I don't think we mean opening things TOMORROW. I sure don't. So when people respond with broad defiance to that concept being expressed at all, in any timeline, it feels like they're saying we should never open up, or not until a vaccine is fully deployed, or, that they have the belief that if we just stay inside for some period of time everything will go away on its own, or that they're personally financially comfortable so we shouldn't have concerns about the broader impacts. Maybe they don't mean that either, but, if they don't, I'm not even sure what they're disagreeing about.

I have seen broad defiance when someone (such as the President) says open up the country on May 1. Having a plan to open up the country has been very positively received in these forums (the California/Oregon/Washington starting to plan for when to re-open for instance), but based on health experts and having a real plan of action. Not a random date.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Interesting. I got my number from the Washington Post. Wonder where they got their number... they are saying total deaths of 33,318. What does Worldmeters say?

Though it may be due to NYC reclassifying some deaths of people suspected of COVID but not tested (considering that the non-COVID death rate in NYC was far higher than usual, they probably realized they were severely undercounting)

Worldometer has 35.

Main difference will be that Post might take CDC/State confirmed cases and thus has to live with data delay (which can be multiple days) whereas Worldometer takes Johns Hopkins data i think who compile it in real time based on local data.

As for daily numbers, Worldometer makes the cutoff at i think 8 PM Eastern time, whereas official data likely have either afternoon or morning.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The first one is easy to explain. A Governor can restrict people in her state from going from one location to another but cannot Constitutionally prevent people from other states from entering her state. It's part of the Commerce Clause (Dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence).

Secondly, perhaps it has been determined that plumbing is essential (if your plumbing ain't working that's an emergency) while planting is not. I don't know the reasoning, but I do know Michigan isn't the only state that has put a kibosh on planting supplies. Perhaps the health experts have a reason there (likely non-essential). Of course Home Depot isn't the only place that sells planting materials - there are dedicated stores to do that.

I've read that some folks were abusing the order on motor boats - namely the ones with bigger motor boats having parties on the boat. I know that happened in Florida. So perhaps the idea that non-motor boats tend to be smaller factored into that. Perhaps the next step should be to allow motor boats but only under a certain size.

But see that is the point - none of these things make sense. You are already at Home Depot - what difference does it make what aisle you're in?

If 20 people are on some big boat having a party then why not issue those people a citation? Why prevent some guy on a lake from being able to go out and fish?

If she can restrict people from moving from a location why doesn't she just restrict people from moving from the area where the trouble spots are - what is the threat if there's not spread in your current area?

The problem with her recent orders are that they appear to be simply her flexing her EO power and don't have any real sense behind them which simply in turn makes everyone question everything. The curve is not getting any more flat because only half of Home Depot is open for business.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I have seen broad defiance when someone (such as the President) says open up the country on May 1. Having a plan to open up the country has been very positively received in these forums (the California/Oregon/Washington starting to plan for when to re-open for instance), but based on health experts and having a real plan of action. Not a random date.

Ohio announced May 1 for a very limited re-opening. And based on how well we've handled the shutdown I'm willing to give Dewine some leeway to figure things out here. He is an R and I am a D. So to say that this is all a red/blue thing ignores the fact that there are some R's out there acting responsibly, and some D's who are idiots. That won't change.

But there has to be a plan and reasoning for doing it. Not just based on some angry people having protests and whining on a message board and a president with random tweets that contradicts his press conferences.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

The curve is not getting any more flat because only half of Home Depot is open for business.

I just want to single this out, because this kind of thing will help. If only half the store is open, fewer people will shop. It won't be as effective as shutting down the store completely, but it will reduce demand if some products are unavailable. It's exactly the kind of balanced approach to claim to want to see happen.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

But see that is the point - none of these things make sense. You are already at Home Depot - what difference does it make what aisle you're in?

Ok, so you narrow tailor the order. Gardening sales are allowed in stores that sell essential products - all of a sudden gardening stores start selling chips and saying they are selling food - an essential product. A broad ban allows for those attempts to be nipped in the bud. Or you could expend your police power on checking out every gardening selling business to see if they have enough essential product sales?

And what JPhillips said. Would result in less people in the store, especially those only looking for gardening supplies.

If 20 people are on some big boat having a party then why not issue those people a citation? Why prevent some guy on a lake from being able to go out and fish?

Police resources once again. And a blanket ban tends to have a dampening effect on people trying to "test the limit" of the rule. I'm sure Governors are in conversation with their police telling them where they are stretched thin.

If she can restrict people from moving from a location why doesn't she just restrict people from moving from the area where the trouble spots are - what is the threat if there's not spread in your current area?

"Trouble spots" are a constantly moving definition. Lots of places that had no cases are now outbreak areas due to things like church services, due to asymptomatic spread. There is no guarantee that Detroit and the like is going to be the only trouble spot in Michigan

So where you see no reason for them, I can see plenty of rational reasoning for some of the bans. Some of it may be a slight overreach or overly broad, but no one wants to be another NY State or get into a "what's the limit" sort of battle on these things.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

The curve is not getting any more flat because only half of Home Depot is open for business.

I'm not sure that's true. My Home Depot and Lowes have their garden centers open. I've been 2-3 times to get seed, mulch, and soil for my garden. I've not gone for any other reason. Point being, if area X is closed, there are Y number of people who will never go to Home Depot at all.

That having been said, that sure does seem like a stupid way to do it. Here in NC (or maybe it's just Guilford County, I lose track of which restrictions are state vs. county,) it's "no more than X% (I think it's 10) of fire capacity can be in any building at one time." So all aisles in Lowe's, Home Depot, Sam's, Costco, Walmart, and the grocery stores are open, but it's really easy to social distance because there just aren't many people in there. All the stores have lines on the floor near the checkout marking 6 feet of distance, and all stores that I go to now have shields.

It does sound like her methods are kinda dumb. It showed up earlier in this thread that folks in my neck of the woods are driving farther than almost anywhere else in the country. I just checked, though, and NC is among the lowest number of deaths per capita in the country, so I'm guessing we're doing *something* right despite the fact that we're fishing, driving to the parks, hiking, and buying non-essential stuff for gardens. (And I'm closer to R than D, and my governor is a D, but in my estimation he has done a splendid job. He has especially balanced state and local control to help deal with urban/rural disparities. ("These are orders for the state, but if your locality has more strict orders, those supercede mine.") Basically, it seems that the state-wide orders are aimed to be enough to keep rural areas safe, and he's counting on country/city leadership in places like Charlotte/Greensboro/Raleigh to do more if necessary.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by Butter

There is a big difference. You don't "catch" heart disease or cancer.

You also typically do not survive those things if you do get them. The vast majority of people seem to survive catching COVID-19

You are not in control of how or when you catch Covid-19 unless you just never leave your house again. And most agree that approach is not feasible. HOWEVER, if you can mitigate loss of life by taking action, don't you agree that you should take that action? I agree that the "cure can't be worse than the disease".

Uh-oh, get prepared to defend yourself against those who feel that statement means you're an evil corporate loving goon that is using it as secret code for let all the poor people die so stocks will go up!

You are not in control if you get heart disease or cancer either and even so unless you literally have no contact with the outside world (meaning no deliveries of anything) you could still contract this virus even if you don't leave your house but that's impossible. We all would need food and supplies at some point. The fact is we have no idea why a small percentage of people die from this nor are we probably likely to figure out that anytime soon.

And not once have I advocated for not mitigating loss. I have zero issue with the steps we have taken up until recently to flatten the curve. It is only once my governor started overreaching that I began to take issue with her orders because we have done what was asked of us and we accomplished what the purpose was - the hospitals were not overrun. People were not dying in the streets and waiting room of this. The stay at home order was meant to allow for hospitals to be able to provide care for anyone who needs it - not to lock us down and shut down the economy for some undetermined date or milestone. When we have done what was asked and accomplished what we were supposed to and then received more draconian restrictions on top of that I think it is only natural to start questioning what is really going on and whether or not the person in charge is qualified.

People's lives financially will be hurt short-term. But as I said before, it seems to me that society's #1 job is to implement policy that keeps people alive. That has to be job 1 right now, period.

I think people's financial lives will be hurt if short-term is a month (done already) or maybe two. The further we go out hurt turns to ruined. You don't "bounce back" from losing your home. Your business doesn't "bounce back" once you can't pay the rent and the loans you took out to keep going and its bankrupt. It's gone. It's an empty building and dozens, hundreds, thousands of jobs lost. Nobody moves in a week later and starts it all up again because nobody has the money to do that (except the uber wealthy and is that what we want? The richest of the rich to swoop up the rest of what they don't own?)

We can keep people alive and still slowly start to function again. The virus isn't going away this month or next month or maybe ever. People are still going to contract it and die and they're dying right now with full medical care. They are not dying because there are bed shortages or ventilator shortages - they're dying with the best efforts we can make. What more can we do to keep people alive? If your body is going to catch it then I think you're going to catch it - all it takes is one trip to the store or even one delivery to your house.

I don't know how much more clear about this I can be. I am not an advocate of going back to business as usual.

People shouldn't go into nursing homes. They shouldn't go around those who are highly compromised. Those who are should stay at home and have little to no contact with anyone for as long as possible. People who are sick with anything should stay home. We shouldn't pack tens of thousands of people in a stadium for anything right now.

Given all of that...we have to find a way to start helping everyone else not just stay alive but live. Slowly. Cautiously. And when the data says their community has flattened that curve. And in doing so people will still continue to contract the virus and a certain percentage will still need serious medical care and will get that care because the hospital can handle the numbers.

I hope that Remdesivir is a successful treatment - it won't stop people from getting it or spreading it but it could get them home alive and that is fantastic news. But the time to knowing whether or not that is possible and to have enough supply is still a ways off. A possible vaccine that is safe and effective is at least a year off. Once we have those things we can go back to something more normal but until then we can only be on lockdown so long and there has to be something in between that and "normal" that we start working towards in the near future.

[molson]

That might be part of the one of the differences of perspectives of this, how bad you think the economic impact could be. I don't care about "short-term" financial struggle. I do care and worry about millions falling into poverty permanently. I don't know which one we'll end up being closer to, but the latter scares me a lot. It's heartbreaking to see people around here already reaching out to strangers on social media asking for diapers and food for their kids. Which is why I mostly align with our governor's position of - we have to extend these restrictive orders, but we must plan right now for a gradual re-opening and figure out the safest ways to open as much as possible. (It's been nice to see a few small businesses opening up for curbside business this week after the governor amended the order to allow that, when he extended every other restriction. Part of re-opening is also evolving the way that we do business to make it safer). Not only is that a critical part of all this, it is also the part we have some control over. Which psychologically, is pretty important to push. Telling or giving people the idea that there's no tangible hope on the horizon, or worse, that we're just fucked until and if there's a vaccine deployed next year or the year after (if that), will just encourage increasingly desperate people to violate existing orders, or start resorting to crime.

And after the wave of service industry job losses, and then a wave of white collar job losses, comes the wave of drastically reduced public services for years to come from the loss of tax revenue. Those impacts are felt a year after the direct economic impacts like business closures. That's some scary shit to me too, as I see what cities are going to end up cutting. Programs and lifelines that took a long time to get implemented in poor parts of the country. (Most personal to me and my work - drug treatment programs, domestic violence victim support programs, diversion courts). All this stuff is going to be gutted, all this stuff that it took decades to implement. New York cut $6 billion for next year's budget from what the plan was in January, and nobody is really sure of the cascading impact of cutting that much so quickly. There's no way around that now, but, there's still a balance to consider and difficult choices to made, and it is worth trying to move forward and to plan to move forward, even at some calculated risk, and an acceptance of idea that things are not going to be again like they were before. Even if that just means that maybe 2022 can be a little better than 2021 if we do the best we can to sensibly bringing some things online in 2020. There will be some more fed bailouts, but as we just saw with the small business loan being tapped out, we can't trust these programs to be implemented properly and not just be exploited by those with the means to do so (massive corporations getting small business loans for their subsidiaries, etc.) And cities and states can't print their own money or go into debt.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I'm not sure that's true. My Home Depot and Lowes have their garden centers open. I've been 2-3 times to get seed, mulch, and soil for my garden. I've not gone for any other reason. Point being, if area X is closed, there are Y number of people who will never go to Home Depot at all.

That having been said, that sure does seem like a stupid way to do it. Here in NC (or maybe it's just Guilford County, I lose track of which restrictions are state vs. county,) it's "no more than X% (I think it's 10) of fire capacity can be in any building at one time." So all aisles in Lowe's, Home Depot, Sam's, Costco, Walmart, and the grocery stores are open, but it's really easy to social distance because there just aren't many people in there. All the stores have lines on the floor near the checkout marking 6 feet of distance, and all stores that I go to now have shields.

It does sound like her methods are kinda dumb.

My bold on the last part for emphasis

Exactly - if she wants less people milling about Home Depot then let greenhouses be open for people who want to buy things to plant. That would be a GREAT solution because it would help those small businesses. Instead it's just nobody can buy anything related to gardening.

There's a way to do this with common sense and logic - she hasn't figured that part out and hopefully now that she is in a coalition with other midwest governors maybe she will let the others like DeWine do the thinking and just go along with them.

[Ben E Lou]

And to be clear, of COURSE there is a point where the combination of deaths due to economic breakdown (starvation, suicide, child/spousal abuse ramped up by isolation and poverty, crimes committed by desperate people who have never broken a law in their lives, etc.) can surpass the number of deaths from the virus. I'm scratching my head that some people can't seem to acknowledge that.

(And I'm one who thinks that summer camps should be closed, school called off the rest of this year and perhaps Fall 2020, and--unless medication proves to be much better than thought--that we should have no mass gatherings in stadiums for at least the rest of 2020.)

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by molson

I've read in this thread that a concern for the broader impacts of this is a fake right-wing talking point, and that the only people who are concerned about opening the economy at some point are rich people who won't be impacted by the dangers.

I don't think anyone has said they aren't concerned about the economic impact. However, I think people have economic concern and health concern on vastly different places on a sliding scale.

But it's also disingenuous to call it a "fake right-wing talking point". There is a pretty large contingent of folks concern trolling about the economy. They don't give a crap about social programs or inequity or poor people normally (bootstraps!) but, now, all of a sudden they do?

SI

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

And to be clear, of COURSE there is a point where the combination of deaths due to economic breakdown (starvation, suicide, child/spousal abuse ramped up by isolation and poverty, crimes committed by desperate people who have never broken a law in their lives surpass the number of deaths from the virus, etc.) can surpass the number of deaths from the virus. I'm scratching my head that some people can't seem to acknowledge that.

(And I'm one who thinks that summer camps should be closed, school called off the rest of this year and perhaps Fall 2020, and--unless medication proves to be much better than thought--that we should have no mass gatherings in stadiums for at least the rest of 2020.)

Quantifying the number to some level as a result of the above is going to be much harder then determining how many people die from Covid-19. That some people seem to think that death counts from Covid are a conspiracy to trample peoples rights and freedoms and keep the country shut down so they can have more control over you. Good luck with a rational number you can generate to have any sort of reasonable conversation about it.

[molson]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

/

I don't think anyone has said they aren't concerned about the economic impact. However, I think people have economic concern and health concern on vastly different places on a sliding scale.

I think concern for the economy is being mocked and misconstrued, but I know we're all interpreting this differently. (What got me into this again after taking a little time away was a post literally saying, "fuck the economy" and others questioning the real motives of people who express these concerns).

And I think the word economy is so cold. I'm not talking about 401k balances or "Trump's precious stock market." Maybe that's what people are thinking of when I feel they're being dismissive.

[ISiddiqui]

Well it's hard to trust Trump or his administration when they talk about the economy, tbf.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

And to be clear, of COURSE there is a point where the combination of deaths due to economic breakdown (starvation, suicide, child/spousal abuse ramped up by isolation and poverty, crimes committed by desperate people who have never broken a law in their lives surpass the number of deaths from the virus, etc.) can surpass the number of deaths from the virus. I'm scratching my head that some people can't seem to acknowledge that.

I'm having a hard time finding where I'm comfortable placing the balance on the scale.

Part of this is that I think we're already doomed to some financial mess. I've thought we were due for one for quite a while and this was just the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. It just happened now instead of 2021-2022 and is more acute. So there's a "sunken cost" there and anyone arguing "it's financial ruin vs saving coronavirus lives" isn't being fair as those both have weights on each end, though we have a broad range for those weights. But if you thought the economy was humming strong and in great shape, you would weigh this a lot differently.

But how much of people's weights is "damage done" vs "future damage". We put the economy on near hold for more than a month, possibly longer to prevent a worst case scenario. If most places couldn't weather 1 month then closing down for, say, 3 months matters little - they were already doomed.

I'm still not sure how "restarted" anything will be until there's a vaccine anyway and that's so very far away. Like there's very little that President Trump or Governor Whitmer can do to get more people to feel safe on airplanes or in hotels or sitting in stadiums (well, that's not entirely true - you can build a significant testing apparatus, but we're stumbling along the way with that and it almost feels like we're going backwards). Those are businesses built on X% occupancy and that X is going to be significantly lower until much of the public feels it is safe to do those things.

SI

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Quantifying the number to some level as a result of the above is going to be much harder then determining how many people die from Covid-19. That some people seem to think that death counts from Covid are a conspiracy to trample peoples rights and freedoms and keep the country shut down so they can have more control over you. Good luck with a rational number you can generate to have any sort of reasonable conversation about it.

Absolutely, but I don't see anyone here who is claiming or implying it's a conspiracy. Perhaps molson's comment helps clarify this for me...

Originally Posted by molson

I think concern for the economy is being mocked and misconstrued, but I know we're all interpreting this differently.

And I think the word economy is so cold. I'm not talking about 401k balances or "Trump's precious stock market." Maybe that's what people are thinking of when I feel they're being dismissive.

Yeah, I get the impression that the folks in this thread aren't talking as much about the market as mass unemployment and poverty.

[molson]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well it's hard to trust Trump or his administration when they talk about the economy, tbf.

Right, and I don't trust Trump or his administration to properly address the aftermath of this. I feel that a singular laser focus on indefinite lockdown necessarily puts more trust in Trump to fix everything later. Which is why I like seeing the governors coming together to plot a cautious path forward.

Edit: People are saying that this all could be an opportunity to change things for the better, the "let's not get back to normal because normal wasn't working", thing. But with Trump the opposite is more likely. He will take advantage of this to make things worse for the rest of us - we've already seen him firing people overseeing the bailouts. There is economic and political opportunity here for those in power. That's why it's critical to worry about and address the economic fallout now at the state and local levels. Otherwise we're just leaving it all to Trump.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Absolutely, but I don't see anyone here who is claiming or implying it's a conspiracy. Perhaps molson's comment helps clarify this for me...
Yeah, I get the impression that the folks in this thread aren't talking as much about the market as mass unemployment and poverty.

I was coming from a more macro view, and a larger view of the populace/media/leadership than just the views being expressed in this thread.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by molson

I've read in this thread that a concern for the broader impacts of this is a fake right-wing talking point, and that the only people who are concerned about opening the economy at some point are rich people who won't be impacted by the dangers.

Hey, but I hope you're right. But when I see any post about the strategies and policies involving with re-opening portions of the economy, there is a lot of pushback to that. But I don't think we mean opening things TOMORROW. I sure don't. So when people respond with broad defiance to that concept being expressed at all, in any timeline, it feels like they're saying we should never open up, or not until a vaccine is fully deployed, or, that they have the belief that if we just stay inside for some period of time everything will go away on its own, or that they're personally financially comfortable so we shouldn't have concerns about the broader impacts. Maybe they don't mean that either, but, if they don't, I'm not even sure what they're disagreeing about.

One word. Trust.

I speak as one Floridian who lives in the state of Florida since the beginning of this. You all watched this play out #FloridaMan so tell me where I might be wrong.

In this state, we did not take the coronavirus seriously at all at the beginning. Fine, we are not that different then every other state. As things began to ramp up, there were calls for measures to be taken. Not the measures we have now. But smaller measures to try to limit the spread. Wash your hands and try not to do any excessive touching.Those measures were ignored and laughed at. The numbers rose. The calls for the stronger measures grew a bit louder, they were ignored as well. Remember when we asked people not to get into groups of more than ten on the beach and not crowd into bars? Do you remember those pictures? Excuse after excuse was made for why there was no reason to implement any formal measures at all. Again, all of this was when everything was wide open. People ignored all of the recommendations and the requests. This is not something I am making up. It is documented. Because we were remained open, while other states were closing down, everyone came here and continue to ignore the recommendations. The numbers continued to rise. Counties began implement their own measures. What did people do? Just moved from one part of the state to another. Exercising the rights? Absolutely. Continuing to spread the virus in places that did have lower cases? Absolutely! Again, remember the picture of the difference between beaches at the county line? The one where one side was completely full and the other side was completely empty? I gave the example in this thread were people playing Ultimate Frisbee in the park. Some of them worked in a local restaurant. Guess what had to shut down because of workers being infected? Finally the statewide safer at home measures were begrudgingly(IMO) started on April 3. That is two weeks ago.

Here are the businesses that have remained open

Healthcare providers
Grocery stores, other food providers and distributors
Businesses that provide social services
Media and telecomm providers
Banks and financial institutions
Hardware stores
Contractors who provide services that are deemed "necessary to maintaining the safety, sanitation, and essential operation residences and other structures"
Mail and shipping services
Laundry providers
Gas stations
Restaurants that provide food for carryout or takeout
Schools (only permitted to be open to facilitate online learning)
Office suppliers
Marinas and docks
The transportation sector (Airlines, trains, buses, taxis, etc)
Funeral homes and mortuaries
Assisted living facilities
Gun stores
Landscape and pool care
Childcare facilities that operate with groups of 10 or fewer
Pet stores and veterinarian services
Utilities services
Constructions site
Manufacturing facilities
Waste management services
Residential and commercial real estate and settlement services

Within two to three days of the statewide measure being enacted, people were already breaking the measures. People were still talking about this like it was the flu and demanding the order be stopped. People were complaining about how dare the grocery store only allow senior citizens in the grocery stores during the first hour of opening. All the while people were already talking about opening the state back up. Not planning to open the state up in a measured way. Opening everything back up the way it was on February 1st.

I say all that to say no I don't trust that people are looking to open back up in a responsible way. I don't trust that people don't mean opening everything up tomorrow. I would love to advocate for the reopening sooner rather than later. Yes, we are now beginning the process not after two or three months as many have claimed. The statewide order here came started on April 3rd. That is two weeks ago. I hope I am proven wrong. But I have recent evidence that we will ignore that small restrictions and rush back to normal, damn the consequences for others. My point is we don't allow that to happen in other crises we deem to be serious and a danger to people's health. Again, I am only talking about Florida but I believe others have similar concerns about their local area as well. I do have concerns about the local small businesses. I don't want anyone to have to go out of business because of this. I also recognize that a second shutdown would be even worse in my opinion. That is why I want this one to be done as correctly as possible. Ultimately, I want to see as much concern about getting the number of tests that we need in Florida as I have seen trying to get the beaches open again. I don't know if our state leaders have the bandwidth to do both and they have made it pretty clear which side they are more concerned with.

On a sidenote, I really hope all this concern about domestic violence, mental health and suicides continues and was not a tool to achieve that reopening goals. I am not making any accusations. It is an observation that is based on the collective concern or lack thereof IMO that we had for these issues before we were asked to stay home a bit more.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Absolutely, but I don't see anyone here who is claiming or implying it's a conspiracy. Perhaps molson's comment helps clarify this for me...
Yeah, I get the impression that the folks in this thread aren't talking as much about the market as mass unemployment and poverty.

My concern from the get go with regards to the economy is driven by your same thought process. If we crater the economy and that leads to deaths via suicide, poverty, etc., what have we really gained?

The problem I have with many, especially if you go to Facebook or social media, you are immediately shouted down because you are the 1% and you just want money, etc.

Another issue, is how many food plants have to shut down before we run afoul of issues related to food shortages. People say food processing plants have to protect workers, but the way they are set up, the workers are going to be in close proximity to one another vs. a paper mill or some other manufacturing facility. There isn't a good way around it without significantly altering their processing methods which means reworking the plant's process flow, and that disrupts operation of the plant as well.

With regards to the market, I love it being down, some of the investment I have put off over the years, I can finally make up for.

But, I will also say I do have concern for an item PilotMan brought up, and that is governmental controls in regards to sheltering in place, but this is the no politics thread so I will leave it at that.

[CrimsonFox]

We had another record number of US deaths in 24 hours. 4591


A friend equated it with having a 9/11 every day. Yup

And it's time for it to start blooming in rural areas and cities that didn't lockdown