Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

Full Version: The Coronavirus
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(04-27-2020, 11:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-27-2020, 11:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]There ought to be some ground between business as used to be usual and shutting it all down.  We may be spending too much effort on one or the other impossible extreme, and not enough on trying to find a middle ground.

So now you're the one valuing green more than grandma.

It's a false dichotomy.  We don't have to look for middle ground.  The statistics say that shutdowns don't do anything.

Extremists seek extreme solutions.  In this case, you can shut down everything or shut down nothing.  What I am saying is that more effort should be put into a safe middle ground.  The objectives of both parties can sometimes be met.

Most of my life I was a software developer working government contracts which were often classified.  The software teams were fairly small, less than the 10 or fewer limit you commonly hear about.  Most often we worked alone on our own piece of the puzzle.  Occasionally the group had a meeting, but there were enough large conference rooms to do distancing.  You would have to have cans of spray cleaner available in the rest rooms.  You might ask people to bring their own lunch.  Sometimes you could work at home without doing more than bringing a few PC sized components home.  Sometimes you couldn’t, as the prototypes were too large or the project too classified.  As the workers were mostly engineers, and used to following the odd security rules, adding a few more extra rules would be no problem.

Another job back in my early college days involved taking newly injected plastic parts out of a molding machine.  Said machine was bigger than a breadbox, (understatement) with only one operator, so we had social distancing whether we wanted it or not.  Only the operator and the supervisor (when something went wrong) touched the machine, usually to turn a valve if parts were over or under filled.  There was one memorable shift when the mold stuck together with a greater strength than the hydraulic press that usually moved half the mold.  The machine eventually tore itself apart.  We decided this was a problem for the day shift.  It would have taken minimal effort to have COVID 19 safety in that plant.  The closest one would have to a problem would be the mid shift break to visit the rest room and cafeteria, and the cafeteria could be replaced with a paper bag.

Another job I worked was cleaning telephone offices and mowing the lawns of such places.  Few places are as free of people as a telephone central office.  It is all automated.  (Can you guess how much battery it takes to drive a town’s phone system though the average hurricane?  Dusting the floor next to the battery, how prudent is it to avoid contacting the ganged batteries?)  Another easy job to get production with isolation.

These are all something where a low level manager, a labor representative, a senior worker, could get together, suggest solutions, and come up with a set of rules which everyone could agree on.  I could see bringing such a set of rules to a local health official and getting blessed to reopen.  It beats promising to test the full population of a meat packaging plant, only to renege on that promise when a large fraction of the managers and supervisors test positive.  Mass murder to gain a few bucks is questionable ethically.

Some places, like the meat packing plants that have been so much on the news, seem to have few good safe affordable policies.  Making those places safe would take a significant effort and considerable expense.  The answer is not to close one’s eyes and murder people.  Neither is it an answer to totally eliminate meat from society’s menu.

But there are more options than the two unacceptable extremes.
(04-27-2020, 05:44 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is on the McConnell “blue state bailout” bandwagon, it looks like. What a way to unify the country in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic and economic crisis. He should know about bailouts given his personal financial history, but the truth is the big blue states have been bankrolling the red states for, well, ever. And done so happily, because this is the United States, and for a majority of the country, united is what it’s all about.

This may be a breaking point issue. Yes, the Blue states have bankrolled the Red states willingly … in the past. I'm getting the impression that those times are passing.
(04-27-2020, 11:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-27-2020, 11:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]There ought to be some ground between business as used to be usual and shutting it all down.  We may be spending too much effort on one or the other impossible extreme, and not enough on trying to find a middle ground.

So now you're the one valuing green more than grandma.

It's a false dichotomy.  We don't have to look for middle ground.  The statistics say that shutdowns don't do anything.

However, something does do something, something other than shutdowns, as is obvious from how much better the Pacific Rim has done than Europe or the US.  We should be looking for what actually works, instead of taking the Puritan approach of falsely assuming that if it hurts, it must work.

I'd suggest two things.  One is voluntary physical distancing, which the people are doing even in states that had no shut downs.  The second is universal use of masks, which the Pacific Rim did from the start, and in the US is heavily resisted.  Things that offer high effectiveness at low cost.

It's obvious that moving expeditiously and effectively are the most important factors.  Australia and New Zealand used shutdowns, testing and contact tracing, and they are done, for all practical purposes.  Sweden is relying on commonsense and a great social and health safety net, with testing and contact tracing, but no shutdown or even social distancing.  We started late and are suffering for it, and that's equally true of Europe.  Singapore started early, quit early and is now back to tightening. Five years from now, we'll know what actually worked best. Obviously, the US in not in the running, though Washington State seems to have been a standout.
(04-28-2020, 04:19 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]It is not that the US is resisting masks, exactly; but that we are being asked to wear them, and yet they are not even being made available. A competent government and society would have had them available in every store and public building for free all over the country. Instead it has been 2 months, and masks are not only not free but not even made available at any store or on amazon, and people are somehow getting masks by making their own in some mysterious way.

Obviously, it is exactly the shutdowns which were employed on the west pacific rim which allowed them to control the virus, while the USA, UK and Italy that resisted shutdowns for too long suffered ongoing and deepening sickness.

Socially, I get a lot of pushback when I mention masks, from both the right and the left; it really seems like people on both sides of the political spectrum are sufficiently racist against east Asians to want to avoid doing things that they are doing successfully.

This also applies to shutdowns; in fact, no Pacific Rim nation has shut down.  Yet, people - including yourself - assume that they have, because they've been brainwashed into thinking shutdowns are the solution, rather than masks.

I do agree that lack of mask availability is also an issue.  Masks are available online, including on Amazon, but the delivery times are long.  Reusable masks are available on Etsy.  People are making them if they know how to sew - not all that mysterious.  But you're right; if the government had been pushing masks from day 1, the economy would have responded, and they'd be broadly available now.  And I also agree they should have been available in the first place; people should probably be wearing them for flu season even if there were no Covid-19.

(04-28-2020, 03:48 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is that social distancing is just too tough when people shop, work out, get groomed, get a tattoo, go to a bar or restaurant, etc. It would be nice if we can open up, but it needs to be done carefully.

I agree that being careful is a good idea.  That's why I advocate adding masks when opening up.  There's actually evidence that, unlike lockdowns, masks work.

(04-28-2020, 03:39 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-27-2020, 11:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]It's a false dichotomy.  We don't have to look for middle ground.  The statistics say that shutdowns don't do anything.

Sure, if your let your ideology trump the statistics.  The difference between California and the east is prompt shutdown.

Washington State never shut down.  No, prompt shutdown is not the difference.  There is in fact no more evidence that shutdowns help than that they hurt.  All there is is speculation.  But the speculation can go both ways.  For example, preventing people from getting out makes vitamin D deficiency more likely, which would reduce immune resistance to Covid-19.  It prevents people from getting exercise, which hurts cardiovascular health and makes people more likely to die if they do get Covid-19.

Let's face it:  shutdowns were a political play so politicians could look like they were doing something about the problem, without having to go to the trouble of first figuring out what things would actually be useful if done.
(04-28-2020, 05:48 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]But there are more options than the two unacceptable extremes.

Yes.  But they're not necessarily "in the middle".  More than likely they are off to one side.
(04-28-2020, 11:39 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-28-2020, 05:48 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]But there are more options than the two unacceptable extremes.

Yes.  But they're not necessarily "in the middle".  More than likely they are off to one side.

Washington is not the only state on the west coast doing well.

Some politicians and corporate heads still put green paper above grandma. There are also many who will compel the ordinary worker to work in unsafe conditions while maintaining themselves in an isolation that keeps them safe. They will shunt safe solutions aside, anything to save them their little green pieces of paper. The latest example is getting Trump to finally use his power to establish and guide use of critical resources, not to make testing, PPE, ventilators and other critical medical gear available, but to compel workers into unsafe environments while withhold compulsions to force the corporations to implement safeguards. It becomes about keeping the corporations safe from lawsuits. They can just claim to have followed government orders.

Shunt the solutions off to the side if you want. They ought to be taken seriously. It is typical of a conservative not to seek them out, to seek their green paper, to kill grandma.
(04-28-2020, 09:57 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-28-2020, 11:39 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-28-2020, 05:48 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]But there are more options than the two unacceptable extremes.

Yes.  But they're not necessarily "in the middle".  More than likely they are off to one side.

Washington is not the only state on the west coast doing well.

Some politicians and corporate heads still put green paper above grandma.  There are also many who will compel the ordinary worker to work in unsafe conditions while maintaining themselves in an isolation that keeps them safe.  They will shunt safe solutions aside, anything to save them their little green pieces of paper.  The latest example is getting Trump to finally use his power to establish and guide use of critical resources, not to make testing, PPE, ventilators and other critical medical gear available, but to compel workers into unsafe environments while withhold compulsions to force the corporations to implement safeguards.  It becomes about keeping the corporations safe from lawsuits.  They can just claim to have followed government orders.

Shunt the solutions off to the side if you want.  They ought to be taken seriously.  It is typical of a conservative not to seek them out, to seek their green paper, to kill grandma.

... all that makes such people feel safe in making such decisions is that they have no fear of a revolution that will topple, dispossess, and judge them. If such decisions are made in callous disregard of human life, especially if those who made such decisions decided that people will die to protect or enhance their profits, then they would be literal murderers.  Revolutionary justice? There is nothing revolutionary about trying killers for murder. 

But such people will more likely face law suits. Ford Motor Company lost huge money for putting a bolt on a location on a Ford Pinto that , if the car were wrecked, could easily pierce the gas tank and cause an explosion. Saying that a politician excused or ordered such will not exculpate persons who made such a decision. 

Trump is attempting to 'give' us a hybrid economy, one with the worst features of Commie rule (a command society devoid of competition) and of capitalism at its most rapacious with an entrenched elite responsible to nobody but capable of maximizing profits for aristocratic privilege. I hate to use the political f-word to describe that... but that also goes along with the political system representing ownership by industry and bureaucratic privilege within powerful organizations.
(04-28-2020, 11:37 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]Washington State never shut down.  No, prompt shutdown is not the difference.

Washington State is under a stay at home order.  Just visited a bunch of their state web pages to see what their policy was.  To my surprise, they were talking about relaxing their shutdown orders should there be continued success.

Here is a link to CNN's summary of where each state stands.

Do reds have a thing about lying about things that can be easily checked?  You don't believe in fact checking either?  Or care?
I quite believe that population density effects how many cases you expect to find. On average, I would expect rural states to have much less infection. Thing is, should people work at a meat packing plant, be incarcerated in a prison, be an occupant of a nursing home, or go shopping in a big urban mall, you are entering high risk high density environments. You can’t expect the average density of the rural state to protect you any more. You just give the bug the odds.
(04-29-2020, 03:24 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Washington State is under a stay at home order.  Just visited a bunch of their state web pages to see what their policy was.  To my surprise, they were talking about relaxing their shutdown orders should there be continued success.

Washington State has an order which they call a "stay at home" order.  It permits people to go to parks and other places.  That's not actually a stay at home order. Calling a cat a dog doesn't make it one.

In addition, even that order was anything but prompt, occurring almost a month after the state reached 1 Covid-19 death per million. In contrast, most states which issued actual lockdowns issue them within days of reaching that milestone.
(04-29-2020, 11:01 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 03:24 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Washington State is under a stay at home order.  Just visited a bunch of their state web pages to see what their policy was.  To my surprise, they were talking about relaxing their shutdown orders should there be continued success.

Washington State has an order which they call a "stay at home" order.  It permits people to go to parks, beaches, etc.  That's not actually a stay at home order.  Calling a cat a dog doesn't make it one.

It does in this case. The effect is the same. By minimizing contact early, but calling the requirement by a different name, they render void your argument that by rapidly isolating you cannot reduce the damage. Even now by insisting on the different name argument your are trying to lie.

I know that with Trump you have to fact check anything he says. That is part of the red schtick. If to try to reinforce your ideology, you have to lie, you lie.

Have you no integrity at all?
(04-29-2020, 11:08 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Have you no integrity at all?

More than you, apparently, as I don't purposely misinterpret posts for political purposes.
(04-29-2020, 11:12 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 11:08 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Have you no integrity at all?

More than you, apparently, as I don't purposely misinterpret posts for political purposes.

Certainly you do.  You lie blatantly to come up with absurd arguments.
(04-29-2020, 11:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 11:12 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 11:08 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Have you no integrity at all?

More than you, apparently, as I don't purposely misinterpret posts for political purposes.

Certainly you do.  You lie blatantly to come up with absurd arguments.
What is he lying about? You seem to be going overboard with the lying accusations lately. Have you no integrity at all? You seem to be lacking in integrity to me. You don't think liberals are capable of lying and making shit up these days. If you don't then you're not paying close enough attention to them these days. You should because you are most likely going to be stuck with them and reliant upon as we're riding out a rather rough and bumpy 4t. I'd say that if you have some health issue that places you at higher risk of being severely impacted or killed by COVID19 then its wise for you to wear a mask and go to more extreme measures to protect yourself from getting it.
(04-29-2020, 11:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Certainly you do.  You lie blatantly to come up with absurd arguments.

Nah.  You just can't comprehend them, so you ascribe bad motives.
(04-29-2020, 02:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]What is he lying about? You seem to be going overboard with the lying accusations lately. Have you no integrity at all? You seem to be lacking in integrity to me. You don't think liberals are capable of lying and making shit up these days. If you don't then you're not paying close enough attention to them these days. You should because you are most likely going to be stuck with them and reliant upon as we're riding out a rather rough and bumpy 4t. I'd say that if you have some health issue that places you at higher risk of being severely impacted or killed by COVID19 then its wise for you to wear a mask and go to more extreme measures to protect yourself from getting it.

I guess that requires a long answer.  The following reviews my view of the crisis, and should not surprise those who have been following the coastal media in general or Rachel Maddow in particular.

One of the numbers originally thrown about in the early days of CORVUS 19 was how many people were infected on average by an infected person.  If that number was above one, you got exponential growth.  The larger the number, the more rapid the growth, the faster you overloaded the health system.  Contrarily, if you lower the infection rate, if you created circumstances by which the number was less than one, you got exponential decay.  The number of infected people would go down.

These days, as the modeling becomes more complex, that number is recognized as being fluid.  Population dense areas have higher numbers, more infections, all other things being equal.  Isolation also matters.  The more precautions you take to isolate people, the lower that number becomes.

What Warren claims is that by changing the name of the legal isolation order, you change whether or not you isolate.  That is not true.  I don’t care what name you write on the executive order, so long as you isolate.  Surely, the bug doesn’t care about the name either.  What is important is that you have isolated, the only tool we currently have to deliberately reduce the infection rate.  (Well, they just approved a therapy drug for emergency use.  Isolation was the only tool this morning.)

Obviously, the sooner you implement isolation, the sooner the infection rate goes below one, the fewer infections.  The better the isolation, the less you have scofflaws working selfishly around it, the faster the isolation will have an effect.  There are no doubt other factors, but both reduce the area under the curve.  Isolate early and more completely.

While the population density is a factor, if you are a prison inmate, an elderly resident of a long term care facility, a meat processor, or anything like that, the average density of your state matters less than the density of your common environment.  While rural states might be able to count on their low population density to achieve what is effectively isolation, these areas are apt to generate local hot spots around places like prisons, nursing homes and meat processing plants.  Those that work at such facilities go home to their families, spreading the effect of the hot spot into the community.

If we had available testing, we could afford this.  We could relax the isolation, allow the infection rate to go above one on average, and test and react to reimpose stricter isolation as hot spots develop.  As yet, this is only a dream.  There are not enough tests.  Thus, opening up without the test allows hotspots to develop without rapidly closing them down as they develop.

The problem with Warren is that he contends by changing the name of the isolation executive order, he holds it not to be isolation.  This is a lie.  This shows a lack of integrity.  The idea that Washington State did not flatten the curve by rapid and strict isolation is false.  Like the rest of the west coast, they acted properly and early.  Any argument that Washington State supports isolation as not effective is void.
(04-29-2020, 03:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 11:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Certainly you do.  You lie blatantly to come up with absurd arguments.

Nah.  You just can't comprehend them, so you ascribe bad motives.

Oh, I comprehend them quite well. The ideology based motives are obvious.
(04-28-2020, 09:59 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-27-2020, 05:44 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is on the McConnell “blue state bailout” bandwagon, it looks like. What a way to unify the country in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic and economic crisis. He should know about bailouts given his personal financial history, but the truth is the big blue states have been bankrolling the red states for, well, ever. And done so happily, because this is the United States, and for a majority of the country, united is what it’s all about.

This may be a breaking point issue.  Yes, the Blue states have bankrolled the Red states willingly … in the past.  I'm getting the impression that those times are passing.

Except that there are some very "blue" areas in the "Red" states -- like New Orleans, Birmingham, Memphis, Nashville, Louisville, St. Louis, and Kansas City. Besides there are some states that get "Blue" results despite "Red" politics  -- like Nebraska and Utah. Besides, "blue" and "red" can shift drastically between eras of politics. West Virginia used to be one of the most reliable states for the Democratic Party, going for the Republican nominee for President only in Republican blowouts. 

So what happened in West Virginia? The Democrats were able to offer small government involving low taxes and government spending because the United Mine Workers solved most of the problems. West Virginia invested little in highways, education, and public health because well-paid coal miners could solve all problems other than the hazards of coal mining. Once the mine seams were worked out, the mining jobs disappeared and the Republicans were able to offer low taxes and minimal government spending without the once-powerful United Mine Workers to ensure solid wages and good medical care. 

It is also possible that Donald Trump is doing far more damage to the Republican Party than many of us can imagine.  In the aftermath we may end up with omnibus politics (the one who follows Biden will most likely to be a Mature Reactive like Washington, Grant, Cleveland, Truman, Eisenhower, and Obama; indeed I can say that the next effective conservative President will act much more like Obama than like Trump. I have loved to compare Eisenhower to Obama for temperament and character; such is the Mature Reactive, and as the oldest of them enter their sixties, such is what we are likely to get before any Kennedy-like Civic offering a 2040's version of a New Frontier. 

Boomers had their chance to give America a Churchill-like, FDR-like, or Lincoln-like leader. Instead they gave us the bad Dubya, the middling Clinton, and the horrible Trump. Time is running out for Boomer contributions to the American political heritage, and Boomers proved that they could bring about the worst in their tendencies with little of their best in public life. Culture? OK-- we will remember Steven Spielberg.
(04-28-2020, 11:37 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-28-2020, 04:19 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]It is not that the US is resisting masks, exactly; but that we are being asked to wear them, and yet they are not even being made available. A competent government and society would have had them available in every store and public building for free all over the country. Instead it has been 2 months, and masks are not only not free but not even made available at any store or on amazon, and people are somehow getting masks by making their own in some mysterious way.

Obviously, it is exactly the shutdowns which were employed on the west pacific rim which allowed them to control the virus, while the USA, UK and Italy that resisted shutdowns for too long suffered ongoing and deepening sickness.

Socially, I get a lot of pushback when I mention masks, from both the right and the left; it really seems like people on both sides of the political spectrum are sufficiently racist against east Asians to want to avoid doing things that they are doing successfully.

This also applies to shutdowns; in fact, no Pacific Rim nation has shut down.  Yet, people - including yourself - assume that they have, because they've been brainwashed into thinking shutdowns are the solution, rather than masks.

I do agree that lack of mask availability is also an issue.  Masks are available online, including on Amazon, but the delivery times are long.  Reusable masks are available on Etsy.  People are making them if they know how to sew - not all that mysterious.  But you're right; if the government had been pushing masks from day 1, the economy would have responded, and they'd be broadly available now.  And I also agree they should have been available in the first place; people should probably be wearing them for flu season even if there were no Covid-19.

I don't find the prospect of making my own mask inviting. I would think those who make masks would know which fabrics actually work. Also, I don't have the "eyes" through which to string a strap. I looked on amazon recently, and now not only do masks take 3 weeks to deliver (and I did not know if they would not be needed after 3 weeks) but now the best ones are not available at all. I checked at my local pharmacies and they have none and don't know when they will have them. So it remains a big mystery to me where they are getting them. I see emails selling them, but I don't trust those.

I don't know about pushback against wearing them; most people are willing. Except of course for those right wing gun toters financed by Betsy DeVoss.

You do seem to have your own idea of "shut down." Most nations and US states have shut down non-essential businesses and issued shelter-in-place orders. That certainly includes those who have been the most successful at controlling the virus, which are mostly Pacific Rim nations: China, South Korea, New Zealand, Australia and Thailand. Italy and the UK shut down-- too late to avoid a cascade of sickness and death. This is slowly declining in Italy, perhaps because of the shutdown, it's hard to tell for sure. The USA similarly has done this in most states, also too-late now to avoid catastrophe, but some red states are lifting these shut-downs and stay-at-home orders too soon. There will be a gradual opening up everywhere, but smart blue states and states with smart governors will open up when the science says it's safe, not when Trump says it's safe. During these "shutdowns" people can go outside and exercize or walk if social distance is observed and crowds avoided.

Quote:
(04-28-2020, 03:48 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is that social distancing is just too tough when people shop, work out, get groomed, get a tattoo, go to a bar or restaurant, etc. It would be nice if we can open up, but it needs to be done carefully.

I agree that being careful is a good idea.  That's why I advocate adding masks when opening up.  There's actually evidence that, unlike lockdowns, masks work.

It all works.

Quote:
(04-28-2020, 03:39 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-27-2020, 11:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]It's a false dichotomy.  We don't have to look for middle ground.  The statistics say that shutdowns don't do anything.

Sure, if your let your ideology trump the statistics.  The difference between California and the east is prompt shutdown.

Washington State never shut down.  No, prompt shutdown is not the difference.  There is in fact no more evidence that shutdowns help than that they hurt.  All there is is speculation.  But the speculation can go both ways.  For example, preventing people from getting out makes vitamin D deficiency more likely, which would reduce immune resistance to Covid-19.  It prevents people from getting exercise, which hurts cardiovascular health and makes people more likely to die if they do get Covid-19.

Let's face it:  shutdowns were a political play so politicians could look like they were doing something about the problem, without having to go to the trouble of first figuring out what things would actually be useful if done.

Many politicians and the president failed to do all of the above. They did not issue shutdowns and social distancing rules in time, they did not provide protective equipment and masks in time, they did not and still do not provide testing and tracking. The feds alone can do this adequately. And waiting to "figure things out" was the problem. That reminds me of what Trump said when he issued his first policy as president, his travel bans which he claimed were needed until "we find out just what's going on!" Remember that? There was never anything to find out; it was an excuse to appeal to his xenophobic fans.

Washington State did "shut down," of course, as I described it above. So did California. Both are doing better per capita than other states that were hit hard. They were #1 and #2 originally in total cases, and now CA is #5 and Washington #16 in total cases during the pandemic. Santa Clara County CA was the first in the nation to get infected, and now its total case curve is downward. It's not even in the top 50 counties anymore in total cases.
(04-29-2020, 03:34 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-29-2020, 02:42 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]What is he lying about? You seem to be going overboard with the lying accusations lately. Have you no integrity at all? You seem to be lacking in integrity to me. You don't think liberals are capable of lying and making shit up these days. If you don't then you're not paying close enough attention to them these days. You should because you are most likely going to be stuck with them and reliant upon as we're riding out a rather rough and bumpy 4t. I'd say that if you have some health issue that places you at higher risk of being severely impacted or killed by COVID19 then its wise for you to wear a mask and go to more extreme measures to protect yourself from getting it.

I guess that requires a long answer.  The following reviews my view of the crisis, and should not surprise those who have been following the coastal media in general or Rachel Maddow in particular.

One of the numbers originally thrown about in the early days of CORVUS 19 was how many people were infected on average by an infected person.  If that number was above one, you got exponential growth.  The larger the number, the more rapid the growth, the faster you overloaded the health system.  Contrarily, if you lower the infection rate, if you created circumstances by which the number was less than one, you got exponential decay.  The number of infected people would go down.

These days, as the modeling becomes more complex, that number is recognized as being fluid.  Population dense areas have higher numbers, more infections, all other things being equal.  Isolation also matters.  The more precautions you take to isolate people, the lower that number becomes.

Except in places such as giant metropolitan areas where people will be crowded together in streets an mass transit (especially Manhattan) in which a reduction in crowding is nearly impossible other than in stay-at-home orders, local crowding matters far more. Thus an offshore oil rig could be very crowded despite being 100 miles from the nearest rig or populated shoreline. A nursing home or a prison in an area that is otherwise full of extensive ranches could easily be a hotbed for an infectious disease.  Public schools had to be closed, as did churches, casual-dining restaurants, museums, theaters, concert halls, libraries, bookstores, banks, beaches, and hair salons. It is arguable that one reason for the closing of so many places is that if there is  no place worthy of going then people won't go anywhere. If there is a Wal*Mart in my community, then I have no reason to go to another Wal*Mart fifty miles away. If I can't visit such a place as the Art Institute of Chicago or the Museum of Natural History... or listen to the Chicago Symphony, then why should I make the pointless day-trip to Chicago?  


Quote:What Warren claims is that by changing the name of the legal isolation order, you change whether or not you isolate.  That is not true.  I don’t care what name you write on the executive order, so long as you isolate.  Surely, the bug doesn’t care about the name either.  What is important is that you have isolated, the only tool we currently have to deliberately reduce the infection rate.  (Well, they just approved a therapy drug for emergency use.  It was the only tool this morning.)


Social shaming may be more effective than roadblocks at the state lines. Sure, I live near a state line, and I know the back roads enough that if I had to cross over into the next state or wanted to do so I could resort to unpaved roads if necessary. This said, I haven't done so even if I could over the last three weeks. What can I now do in Indiana or Ohio that I cannot do in Michigan? Apparently, nothing. Indiana and Ohio seem to be shut down just as much as Michigan.  


Quote:Obviously, the sooner you implement isolation, the sooner the infection rate goes below one, the fewer infections.  The better the isolation, the less you have scofflaws working selfishly around it, the faster the isolation will have an effect.  There are no doubt other factors, but both reduce the area under the curve.  Isolate early and more completely.


Human nature as it is, the sooner that the isolation is imposed, and the more rigidly it is imposed, the more likely it is that when people start getting the irresistible urge to go to the boat launch, the hiking trail, the golf course, or the beach that the transmission of COVID-19 will stall. Nothing can so keep people at home as the absence of places to which to go. We will need breaks from the isolation because we as people like communicating, we want to date if we are not married, we have curiosity, and we are materialistic.  But if we are able to shelter in place, maybe more of those things that we have overpowering urges to do because they are inherent in human nature will be available -- faster.    


Quote:While the population density is a factor, if you are a prison inmate, an elderly resident of a long term care facility, a meat processor, or anything like that, the average density of your state matters less than the density of your common environment.  While rural states might be able to count on their low population density to achieve what is effectively isolation, these areas are apt to generate local hot spots around places like prisons, nursing homes and meat processing plants.  Those that work at such facilities go home to their families, spreading the effect of the hot spot into the community.

Precisely. It has been my habit to salute American veterans for their service -- but I just recently saluted a prison guard for such. I know exactly what "Corrections" means. I have also been thanking peopole for wearing masks and telling people to get or make them while in stores. Yes, I wear one. 

I went to a drive-in today and ordered an ice-cream cone, and and wore my mask while giving the order and receiving it. I closed my window while I ate the cone. I suppose that such is safe contact...  



Quote:If we had available testing, we could afford this.  We could relax the isolation, allow the infection rate to go above one on average, and test and react to reimpose stricter isolation as hot spots develop.  As yet, this is only a dream.  There are not enough tests.  Thus, opening up without the test allows hotspots to develop without rapidly closing them down as they develop.


We would be doing this. People would be tested before boarding trains, buses, subways, boats, and trams or checking in for lodging. They would pay a fee for such because such allows them to do what they otherwise would not do. Employers would do so to keep workplaces safe, and they would be able to pass the cost on to us in higher prices. Our economic system can thrive only if people have mobility, and only when we get that mobility back will we get relief from high unemployment.  

Quote:The problem with Warren is that he contends by changing the name of the isolation executive order, he holds it not to be isolation.  This is a lie.  This shows a lack of integrity.  The idea that Washington State did not flatten the curve by rapid and strict isolation is false.  Like the rest of the west coast, they acted properly and early.  Any argument that Washington State supports isolation as not effective is void.

In Michigan, the governor has opened the state to golf and motorboating while allowing stores to demand that people wear masks. Heck, if I were the store manager I would have someone selling the masks with my company logo on it to people who do not come with them. Wear some sort of mask -- or go home. People can have curbside pickup or even have good delivered. Such costs a customer money, but if you want any special breaks in this time you had better be ready to pay for them.

So life can be boring, lonely, frustrating, and impoverished due to a Crisis. Just think of what it would have been like to be a British Jew who had bigger concerns such as keeping the Wehrmacht, Gestapo, and SS out of your country? Crises are not easy times, but they can certain give a powerful meaning to life. It can certainly define the rest of one's life as no other era can.

We are finding out that there are more important things in life than "retail therapy", playing basketball, going bowling, attending concerts, watching movies on a giant screen, having complex meals, pumping coins into slot machines, or viewing great art. Avoiding a ventilator (which has only about a 20% survival rate) doesn't sound worth the risk.