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.
A reporter asked Trump after an indoor rally which featured little in the way of masks and distancing why this policy wasn't a problem.  The response was to ask the reporter to stand a little further away.  Apparently, as long as he was safe, the policy was OK.  The rest of the American people were not a concern.

Anyway, CNN's Anderson Cooper put out a piece on the clash between what Trump knew and what he presented to the people.
[Image: 3054edf93389294ecef0dce48a4180630838fd71...=800&h=440]

Close down the bars, or have people wear masks and drink through a straw. You can slip a straw around a mask, can you not?
(09-14-2020, 06:32 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]One of Trump's political lackeys proposed that the CDC's support of science is motivated by its opposition to Trump... and got his social media account on which he made the declaration deactivated.  Is pursuing science akin to hating Trump?

There was also a suggestion by him that the 2nd Amendment types in the Trump click need to be ready to defend their President when the Dems steal the election and he refuses to step down on January 21st.
In 175 years of its existence, Scientific American, truly a great magazine to which I encourage anyone with the cognitive ability to appreciate its often terse and technical prose to read... and to subscribe... has never made an endorsement for President. This year is different.

POLICY & ETHICS
Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden
We’ve never backed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history—until now

By THE EDITORS | Scientific American October 2020 Issue
Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden
Credit: Ross MacDonald

Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history. This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.

The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September. He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous and more equitable future.

The pandemic would strain any nation and system, but Trump's rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines. Testing people for the virus, and tracing those they may have infected, is how countries in Europe and Asia have gained control over their outbreaks, saved lives, and successfully reopened businesses and schools. But in the U.S., Trump claimed, falsely, that “anybody that wants a test can get a test.” That was untrue in March and remained untrue through the summer. Trump opposed $25 billion for increased testing and tracing that was in a pandemic relief bill as late as July. These lapses accelerated the spread of disease through the country—particularly in highly vulnerable communities that include people of color, where deaths climbed disproportionately to those in the rest of the population.


It wasn't just a testing problem: if almost everyone in the U.S. wore masks in public, it could save about 66,000 lives by the beginning of December, according to projections from the University of Washington School of Medicine. Such a strategy would hurt no one. It would close no business. It would cost next to nothing. But Trump and his vice president flouted local mask rules, making it a point not to wear masks themselves in public appearances. Trump has openly supported people who ignored governors in Michigan and California and elsewhere as they tried to impose social distancing and restrict public activities to control the virus. He encouraged governors in Florida, Arizona and Texas who resisted these public health measures, saying in April—again, falsely—that “the worst days of the pandemic are behind us” and ignoring infectious disease experts who warned at the time of a dangerous rebound if safety measures were loosened.

And of course, the rebound came, with cases across the nation rising by 46 percent and deaths increasing by 21 percent in June. The states that followed Trump's misguidance posted new daily highs and higher percentages of positive tests than those that did not. By early July several hospitals in Texas were full of COVID-19 patients. States had to close up again, at tremendous economic cost. About 31 percent of workers were laid off a second time, following the giant wave of unemployment—more than 30 million people and countless shuttered businesses—that had already decimated the country. At every stage, Trump has rejected the unmistakable lesson that controlling the disease, not downplaying it, is the path to economic reopening and recovery.

Trump repeatedly lied to the public about the deadly threat of the disease, saying it was not a serious concern and “this is like a flu​” when he knew it was more lethal and highly transmissible, according to his taped statements to journalist Bob Woodward. His lies encouraged people to engage in risky behavior, spreading the virus further, and have driven wedges between Americans who take the threat seriously and those who believe Trump's falsehoods. The White House even produced a memo attacking the expertise of the nation's leading infectious disease physician, Anthony Fauci, in a despicable attempt to sow further distrust.

Trump's reaction to America's worst public health crisis in a century has been to say “I don't take responsibility at all.” Instead he blamed other countries and his White House predecessor, who left office three years before the pandemic began.

But Trump's refusal to look at the evidence and act accordingly extends beyond the virus. He has repeatedly tried to get rid of the Affordable Care Act while offering no alternative; comprehensive medical insurance is essential to reduce illness. Trump has proposed billion-dollar cuts to the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, agencies that increase our scientific knowledge and strengthen us for future challenges. Congress has countermanded his reductions. Yet he keeps trying, slashing programs that would ready us for future pandemics and withdrawing from the World Health Organization. These and other actions increase the risk that new diseases will surprise and devastate us again.


ADVERTISEMENT
Trump also keeps pushing to eliminate health rules from the Environmental Protection Agency, putting people at more risk for heart and lung disease caused by pollution. He has replaced scientists on agency advisory boards with industry representatives. In his ongoing denial of reality, Trump has hobbled U.S. preparations for climate change, falsely claiming that it does not exist and pulling out of international agreements to mitigate it. The changing climate is already causing a rise in heat-related deaths and an increase in severe storms, wildfires and extreme flooding.

Joe Biden, in contrast, comes prepared with plans to control COVID-19, improve health care, reduce carbon emissions and restore the role of legitimate science in policy making. He solicits expertise and has turned that knowledge into solid policy proposals.

On COVID-19, he states correctly that “it is wrong to talk about ‘choosing' between our public health and our economy.... If we don't beat the virus, we will never get back to full economic strength.” Biden plans to ramp up a national testing board, a body that would have the authority to command both public and private resources to supply more tests and get them to all communities. He also wants to establish a Public Health Job Corps of 100,000 people, many of whom have been laid off during the pandemic crisis, to serve as contact tracers and in other health jobs. He will direct the Occupational Health and Safety Administration to enforce workplace safety standards to avoid the kind of deadly outbreaks that have occurred at meat-processing plants and nursing homes. While Trump threatened to withhold money from school districts that did not reopen, regardless of the danger from the virus, Biden wants to spend $34 billion to help schools conduct safe in-person instruction as well as remote learning.



Biden is getting advice on these public health issues from a group that includes David Kessler, epidemiologist, pediatrician and former U.S. Food and Drug Administration chief; Rebecca Katz, immunologist and global health security specialist at Georgetown University; and Ezekiel Emanuel, bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. It does not include physicians who believe in aliens and debunked virus therapies, one of whom Trump has called “very respected” and “spectacular.”

Biden has a family and caregiving initiative, recognizing this as key to a sustained public health and economic recovery. His plans include increased salaries for child care workers and construction of new facilities for children because the inability to afford quality care keeps workers out of the economy and places enormous strains on families.



On the environment and climate change, Biden wants to spend $2 trillion on an emissions-free power sector by 2035, build energy-efficient structures and vehicles, push solar and wind power, establish research agencies to develop safe nuclear power and carbon capture technologies, and more. The investment will produce two million jobs for U.S. workers, his campaign claims, and the climate plan will be partly paid by eliminating Trump's corporate tax cuts. Historically disadvantaged communities in the U.S. will receive 40 percent of these energy and infrastructure benefits.

It is not certain how many of these and his other ambitions Biden will be able to accomplish; much depends on laws to be written and passed by Congress. But he is acutely aware that we must heed the abundant research showing ways to recover from our present crises and successfully cope with future challenges.

Although Trump and his allies have tried to create obstacles that prevent people from casting ballots safely in November, either by mail or in person, it is crucial that we surmount them and vote. It's time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science.

Editor’s Note (9/15/20): This article has been edited after its publication in the October 2020 issue of Scientific American to reflect recent reporting.

This article was originally published with the title "From Fear to Hope" in Scientific American 323, 4, 12-13 (October 2020)

doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1020-12

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)
THE EDITORS
Recent Articles
Welcome to 175 Years of Discovery
Three Ways to Fix Toxic Policing
Too Many Black Americans Are Dying from COVID-19

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...joe-biden/
[Image: 59a1d14ee98913f8de2772495133de2242ae38f2...=800&h=465]
A guide:

[Image: 012fc46e690158214e8679cf8c144d63a7307029...60a645.png]
My guess:

1. Winter is approaching, and in most parts of the country the windows will be shut behind what was an open screen. (To be sure, the opposite effect may apply in places with hot summers and mild winters, like Florida and much of the desert Southwest.  Still, I would advise people to spend as much time outside as possible. It is far easier to dress up for the cold than to prepare yourself for a ventilator. Poorly-ventilated places (whatever that means) are dangerous for any extended contact. 

2. Don't ditch the mask. Maybe you don't need it on the ski slope, but you will need it in the ski lodge. Christmas caroling is safe behind a mask --- but not without one.  I remember seeing a recent performance of a Bach motet -- singers masked. 

3. Some restaurants will foolishly open... at the least, do not dine inside. You may not like dining in a car... but at least it can be warm, and the seating is comfortable. Bars? GAAK! I can't imagine worse people to be around than slobbering, loud-mouth drunks in this plague.

4. The trickiest part of travel could easily be toilets. Many places have closed theirs.  

5. Avoid crowded places. Consider "Black Friday" events the worst possible mass-spreader events. Try to limit your holiday shopping to small businesses at slow times by local standards. Buy on line. Keep six feet apart at the least. Consider alternatives to shopping for supplying people with memorable gifts -- like your artistic creations if you have the talent for such. Contrary to what Big Business and its political stooges say, your individuality is more precious than your ability to blow money.

6. Don't be a spreader. If you are a spreader you are as much a danger of this 

(I'm tired of posting images of rattlesnakes, and I am sure you are tired of seeing those). Rattlesnakes at least hibernate in the winter, but critters more dangerous don't. Like rabid dogs and people infected with SARS-2).

7. Do conference calls instead of visits. If loved ones lack the technology, then get them the technology. 

8. See America best by car. Fall foliage is approaching its peak. Enjoy it. But avoid bars and crowds. 

9. Watch the big sporting events (like the World Series and the Superbowl) at home, and not in big groups.

10. Get exercise. Remember: 40 F on with little wind and copious sunshine is still nice weather. Use it. Such days will be precious Up North from November to March. Use such weather. Just dress for it. Exercise is great for your disposition. 

11. Watch your weight. Se also 10. 

12. Write and send letters. That may be your social life. People may like seeing real handwriting, and e-mails are easy to lose.

13. Wash your hands, wash your hands, wash your hands!
Rachel Maddow’s leading segment tonight focused on an apparent decision by the Trump White House to go for the herd immunity solution to COVID. Rachel responded by working though the assumptions that people who had the bug were immune, that you need 65% to 70% of the people to have had the bug to get effective immunity, that a certain percentage of the people who have the bug die, which leaves Trump perfectly happy with two to six million people dead.

I have been thinking of six million Jews targeted by Hitler as the yardstick. It looks like Trump is looking at that neighborhood.

But the idea of as many people as possible catching the bug as quickly as possible is consistent with his running super spreader events, his requiring schools to open, his declaring meat processing plants essential but not requiring the companies to make it safer for the workers, his general contempt for keeping people alive. He has also started to recommend to the states that they minimize precautions.

Rachel also had reports by two ‘doctors’ who approve of this. One is the White House adviser. The other was the CDC spokesman. Both had emphasized their linkage to certain colleges. Both colleges found it prudent to make it clear that these folks were no longer associated with the schools, both medical staffs of the colleges are for isolation and minimizing the disease until a vaccine is developed, I guess the common estimate is late 2nd quarter or 3rd quarter of 2021.

The thing I wonder is how long it will take to get 65% of the population infected. If we are already around 200,000 dead, how long does it take to get to 6 million and herd immunity? If we assume that Biden will win in November and take power in February, assuming Trump is striving to kill as many people as he can in the meantime, and continues to do so until February of 2021, how many people will Trump kill before a sane scientific approach gets implemented?

I personally am not too worried about it. It seems like most of the people he is killing live on Earth Two, lacking masks, not distancing, attending super spreader events, opening schools and the rest. Me, I am staying properly isolated. It seems to be more their problem. Will the herd immunity formation be impeded by those stubborn blue people living in blue states taking all sorts of isolation precautions? How much will it take for the red people to wise up? How many careful blue folks will be murdered by carefree no precaution reds?
The USA had over 40,000 new cases and over a thousand new deaths today from coronavirus. The pandemic is not going away. Most people have been pretty diligent in following the rules and guidelines. I suppose maybe a relatively few skeptics and trumpers and indulgent young party animals are ruining it for everyone else. Or the ways we are trying to limit the spread of the virus just don't work. It seems they work in some places that know how to do it and don't open too soon, but some European countries have failed too, as well as India and Latin America. And in some places we don't know how it's going, because the government won't or can't keep track.

Republicans and sometimes Democrats open things up too soon, following Trump's fantasies. But now it seems too late to correct this, and the pandemic is going to be with us for a long time. They are also going to drag their feet getting the vaccine out to people, using all sorts of excuses. I hope if Biden gets in that the response will be more sane and efficient. But it is frustrating that lots of people are doing something about it and nothing ever changes. Biden's poll numbers are slowly trending downward, and enough people might like happy talk that they might settle for 4 more years of this hell.
(09-16-2020, 10:08 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]The thing I wonder is how long it will take to get 65% of the population infected.  If we are already around 200,000 dead, how long does it take to get to 6 million and herd immunity?  If we assume that Biden will win in November and take power in February, assuming Trump is striving to kill as many people as he can in the meantime, and continues to do so until February of 2021, how many people will Trump kill before a sane scientific approach gets implemented?

I personally am not too worried about it.  It seems like most of the people he is killing live on Earth Two, lacking masks, not distancing, attending super spreader events, opening schools and the rest.  Me, I am staying properly isolated.  It seems to be more their problem.  Will the herd immunity formation be impeded by those stubborn blue people living in blue states taking all sorts of isolation precautions?  How much will it take for the red people to wise up?  How many careful blue folks will be murdered by carefree no precaution reds?

I live in Earth Two.  Being responsible and surviving is doable here too -- it's just hard.  I've shunned basic masking for N95s, which look intimidating and get mocked, but whatever.  We have a long developed circle of acquaintances (I would have used the term friends a few months ago, but maybe not now).  What makes it harder is the low prevalence of the disease here, which is also its most redeeming feature.  We'll do very well until we don't.
(09-16-2020, 10:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The USA had over 40,000 new cases and over a thousand new deaths today from coronavirus. The pandemic is not going away. Most people have been pretty diligent in following the rules and guidelines. I suppose maybe a relatively few skeptics and trumpers and indulgent young party animals are ruining it for everyone else. Or the ways we are trying to limit the spread of the virus just don't work. It seems they work in some places that know how to do it and don't open too soon, but some European countries have failed too, as well as India and Latin America. And in some places we don't know how it's going, because the government won't or can't keep track.

Republicans and sometimes Democrats open things up too soon, following Trump's fantasies. But now it seems too late to correct this, and the pandemic is going to be with us for a long time. They are also going to drag their feet getting the vaccine out to people, using all sorts of excuses. I hope if Biden gets in that the response will be more sane and efficient. But it is frustrating that lots of people are doing something about it and nothing ever changes. Biden's poll numbers are slowly trending downward, and enough people might like happy talk that they might settle for 4 more years of this hell.

I almost believe that we will have to do another lockdown, this one nationwide, and as rigidly as ever in all states. That most likely will be near the start of the Biden Presidency. There might even have to be fuel rationing to keep people from traveling long distances. I didn't do much long-distance driving when Michigan was under lockdown because there was nowhere to go  (because there was nothing to do except -- what-- go to a grocery store? 

We didn't quite get it right the first time, so we will probably have to start over with perhaps 300,000 people dead by then.

Maybe some of us will be delighted to watch how the Hague Tribunal treats President Trump.
(09-17-2020, 04:51 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-16-2020, 10:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The USA had over 40,000 new cases and over a thousand new deaths today from coronavirus. The pandemic is not going away. Most people have been pretty diligent in following the rules and guidelines. I suppose maybe a relatively few skeptics and trumpers and indulgent young party animals are ruining it for everyone else. Or the ways we are trying to limit the spread of the virus just don't work. It seems they work in some places that know how to do it and don't open too soon, but some European countries have failed too, as well as India and Latin America. And in some places we don't know how it's going, because the government won't or can't keep track.

Republicans and sometimes Democrats open things up too soon, following Trump's fantasies. But now it seems too late to correct this, and the pandemic is going to be with us for a long time. They are also going to drag their feet getting the vaccine out to people, using all sorts of excuses. I hope if Biden gets in that the response will be more sane and efficient. But it is frustrating that lots of people are doing something about it and nothing ever changes. Biden's poll numbers are slowly trending downward, and enough people might like happy talk that they might settle for 4 more years of this hell.

I almost believe that we will have to do another lockdown, this one nationwide, and as rigidly as ever in all states. That most likely will be near the start of the Biden Presidency. There might even have to be fuel rationing to keep people from traveling long distances. I didn't do much long-distance driving when Michigan was under lockdown because there was nowhere to go  (because there was nothing to do except -- what-- go to a grocery store? 

We didn't quite get it right the first time, so we will probably have to start over with perhaps 300,000 people dead by then.

Maybe some of us will be delighted to watch how the Hague Tribunal treats President Trump.

Unless Kelly is elected and sworn in Nov.30 and 3 other Republicans refuse to confirm Trump's SCOTUS appointment, and the Democrats delay the appointment until then or until Jan.3, whatever Biden does will be subject to lawsuits and the rulings of a cabal dedicated to the outdated and evil, destructive ideology of the Classic Xers of America. The Democrats must do everything possible to delay and obstruct this appointment.
(09-16-2020, 10:08 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Rachel Maddow’s leading segment tonight focused on an apparent decision by the Trump White House to go for the herd immunity solution to COVID.  Rachel responded by working though the assumptions that people who had the bug were immune, that you need 65% to 70% of the people to have had the bug to get effective immunity, that a certain percentage of the people who have the bug die, which leaves Trump perfectly happy with two to six million people dead.

I have been thinking of six million Jews targeted by Hitler as the yardstick.  It looks like Trump is looking at that neighborhood.

But the idea of as many people as possible catching the bug as quickly as possible is consistent with his running super spreader events, his requiring schools to open, his declaring meat processing plants essential but not requiring the companies to make it safer for the workers, his general contempt for keeping people alive.  He has also started to recommend to the states that they minimize precautions.

Rachel also had reports by two ‘doctors’ who approve of this.  One is the White House adviser.  The other was the CDC spokesman.  Both had emphasized their linkage to certain colleges.  Both colleges found it prudent to make it clear that these folks were no longer associated with the schools, both medical staffs of the colleges are for isolation and minimizing the disease until a vaccine is developed, I guess the common estimate is late 2nd quarter or 3rd quarter of 2021.

The thing I wonder is how long it will take to get 65% of the population infected.  If we are already around 200,000 dead, how long does it take to get to 6 million and herd immunity?  If we assume that Biden will win in November and take power in February, assuming Trump is striving to kill as many people as he can in the meantime, and continues to do so until February of 2021, how many people will Trump kill before a sane scientific approach gets implemented?

I personally am not too worried about it.  It seems like most of the people he is killing live on Earth Two, lacking masks, not distancing, attending super spreader events, opening schools and the rest.  Me, I am staying properly isolated.  It seems to be more their problem.  Will the herd immunity formation be impeded by those stubborn blue people living in blue states taking all sorts of isolation precautions?  How much will it take for the red people to wise up?  How many careful blue folks will be murdered by carefree no precaution reds?

I think very possibly the legislative process you envision for our information age will only be able to start operating if Trump's appointment is blocked. Otherwise the SCOTUS cabal can over-rule everything done, and keep us in the statemate of the last 40 years in which this legislative process has been prohibited from operating. There will likely be no recourse except secession and probable civil war, and a positive outcome also unlikely.
(09-20-2020, 03:23 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I think very possibly the legislative process you envision for our information age will only be able to start operating if Trump's appointment is blocked. Otherwise the SCOTUS cabal can over-rule everything done, and keep us in the statemate of the last 40 years in which this legislative process has been prohibited from operating. There will likely be no recourse except secession and probable civil war, and a positive outcome also unlikely.

I suspect you are underestimating the Trump justices. They are not being selected as being the most loyal to Trump, but by a conservative think tank who is looking for young conservative lawyers. This means that like Scalia, they look for the meaning of the text and intent of the authors.

What they are bad at is legislating from the bench. The prototypical liberal lawyer invents something that wasn't there. For example he might take a bunch of homophobic founding fathers and twist out of their words a right to be homosexual that did not exist at the time. Even RGB in her solid interpretation of the law was admittedly looking for any excuse to use the founding father's words to create equality for women, something that did not exist at all at the time.

And the conservative think tank is doing it's best to nominating young Scalia clones, loyal to the text and the intent of the authors, not at all loyal to Trump. As a result Trump has been burned by a bunch of his own judges.

But I may be looking at it a little differently.
(09-20-2020, 04:32 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-20-2020, 03:23 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I think very possibly the legislative process you envision for our information age will only be able to start operating if Trump's appointment is blocked. Otherwise the SCOTUS cabal can over-rule everything done, and keep us in the statemate of the last 40 years in which this legislative process has been prohibited from operating. There will likely be no recourse except secession and probable civil war, and a positive outcome also unlikely.

I suspect you are underestimating the Trump justices.  They are not being selected as being the most loyal to Trump, but by a conservative think tank who is looking for young conservative lawyers.  This means that like Scalia, they look for the meaning of the text and intent of the authors.

What they are bad at is legislating from the bench.  The prototypical liberal lawyer invents something that wasn't there.  For example he might take a bunch of homophobic founding fathers and twist out of their words a right to be homosexual that did not exist at the time.  Even RGB in her solid interpretation of the law was admittedly looking for any excuse to use the founding father's words to create equality for women, something that did not exist at all at the time.

And the conservative think tank is doing it's best to nominating young Scalia clones, loyal to the text and the intent of the authors, not at all loyal to Trump.  As a result Trump has been burned by a bunch of his own judges.

But I may be looking at it a little differently.

I do see it differently. Obviously, as you suggest, we can't apply the intent of the authors living in 1787 to the conditions of society in 2020. Judging in favor of equality for women was the right decision. Scalia was a rightwing justice, and his approach to most questions put before him was the opposite of Justice Ginsberg's. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito and Clarence Thomas, and Scalia before them, may have told us "they look for the meaning of the text and intent of the authors," and the liberals say much the same (Justice's Sotamayor's statement at her confirmation hearing was that her priority is "fidelity to the law"), but in practice the judgments of right-wing judges are based on "movement conservative" ideology, and they are chosen on that basis. The Federalist Society is dedicated to this movement; it is not dedicated to the constitution per se. The basis of judgement by these judges and their supporters is neo-liberal ideology. 

The other Ginsberg, an appeals court justice who was named to SCOTUS by Reagan and took his name out of consideration years ago as a substitute for Bork, recently created a documentary that shows the impact of the right-wing orientation and the decisions that result. https://www.pbs.org/show/more-or-less-pe...-ginsburg/ Basically, whatever is incompatible with libertarian economics is not allowed by these justices. He may have been more up to date than the Dred Scott decision, but that's as far as it goes. And in fact he framed his views on that decision as a deviation from the original intent of the founders.

Right now, Chief Justice John Roberts is the only one standing in the way of judgments based on loyalty to Trump, or his legacy and the legacy of Reagan and Bush, and not on what is best for the republic and society. Some of the decisions that went against Trump were 5-4 with Roberts being the deciding vote. So your confidence that justices at least sometimes will rule on behalf of the constitution and the public good should probably be limited to Justice Roberts. And if Trump's appointment succeeds, he will be outvoted.

The conservative judges routinely put the interests of corporate big business and wealthy financiers and business owners ahead of those of the public customers and employees and the functioning of the economy. They put these interests ahead of the environment on which we all depend. They put them ahead of the rights of those not of the straight white male identity. And of course, they did not conceive the nature of modern weapons and their threat to public safety, or a society that had a militia besides all armed and well-regulated male citizens. As you mentioned, in 1787 the founders did not have in their minds these public interests, because these public interests were beyond their experience at the time, but if justices today don't have them we will all be trampled upon and destroyed. I don't really understand how "the meaning of the text and intent of the authors" can really justify decisions that favor the powerful and wealthy few against the interests of the people. But, those recommended by the Federalist Society always do.

The name seems a good clue. Ostensibly it means interpreting the constitution as the members of the Federalist Party would have done, or so they claim perhaps, what is written in the Federalist Papers. What this means in practice is that their decisions are based on the mindset of members of the Federalist Party as they experienced society and the world. That means they are all living as if it were still the 1780s and 1790s, and they want to return us to that world.

I suspect it's possible that if Biden orders an economic shutdown or any use of the War Production Act or other covid-related mandate, the new Trump Court will over-rule it as restraint of trade.
(09-20-2020, 03:23 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-16-2020, 10:08 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Rachel Maddow’s leading segment tonight focused on an apparent decision by the Trump White House to go for the herd immunity solution to COVID.  Rachel responded by working though the assumptions that people who had the bug were immune, that you need 65% to 70% of the people to have had the bug to get effective immunity, that a certain percentage of the people who have the bug die, which leaves Trump perfectly happy with two to six million people dead.

I have been thinking of six million Jews targeted by Hitler as the yardstick.  It looks like Trump is looking at that neighborhood.

But the idea of as many people as possible catching the bug as quickly as possible is consistent with his running super spreader events, his requiring schools to open, his declaring meat processing plants essential but not requiring the companies to make it safer for the workers, his general contempt for keeping people alive.  He has also started to recommend to the states that they minimize precautions.

Rachel also had reports by two ‘doctors’ who approve of this.  One is the White House adviser.  The other was the CDC spokesman.  Both had emphasized their linkage to certain colleges.  Both colleges found it prudent to make it clear that these folks were no longer associated with the schools, both medical staffs of the colleges are for isolation and minimizing the disease until a vaccine is developed, I guess the common estimate is late 2nd quarter or 3rd quarter of 2021.

The thing I wonder is how long it will take to get 65% of the population infected.  If we are already around 200,000 dead, how long does it take to get to 6 million and herd immunity?  If we assume that Biden will win in November and take power in February, assuming Trump is striving to kill as many people as he can in the meantime, and continues to do so until February of 2021, how many people will Trump kill before a sane scientific approach gets implemented?

I personally am not too worried about it.  It seems like most of the people he is killing live on Earth Two, lacking masks, not distancing, attending super spreader events, opening schools and the rest.  Me, I am staying properly isolated.  It seems to be more their problem.  Will the herd immunity formation be impeded by those stubborn blue people living in blue states taking all sorts of isolation precautions?  How much will it take for the red people to wise up?  How many careful blue folks will be murdered by carefree no precaution reds?

I think very possibly the legislative process you envision for our information age will only be able to start operating if Trump's appointment is blocked. Otherwise the SCOTUS cabal can over-rule everything done, and keep us in the statemate of the last 40 years in which this legislative process has been prohibited from operating. There will likely be no recourse except secession and probable civil war, and a positive outcome also unlikely.

I had never seen the words in use, but they date to 1923, relating to bacterial infections. Viruses spread more easily than bacterial infections and are more easily treated. A new virus such as SARS-2 or the one behind the Spanish influenza outbreak of a century ago can ravage a population. (We just hit the grim milestone of 200,000 deaths, roughly the population of such places as Yonkers, New York; Amarillo, Texas; Des Moines, Iowa; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Augusta, Georgia). 

There could have been fitting protections of people in the meat-packing industry, but such would have cut into profits or raised consumer prices. Someone who believes that all life is economic in objective could make such a decision; Donald Trump is the definitive example of Homo oeconomicus, and therein we find an explanation. Homo oeconomicus can not recognize that he is his brother's keeper when there is economic gain to be had from someone else's misfortune. I would expect such from a slave trafficker or a mobster.

We are in a Crisis Era, and in a Crisis Era people are more willing to make sacrifices for the general good so long as such creates a better, safer, or more just world. People can put up with rationing, higher taxes, reduced income, and shortages at the least. Figure that some waiters who made good pay on tips are often working in fast-food places for near-minimum wages because of necessity. 

Homo oeconomicus is prone to quackery in belief, especially when such serves a definitive expression of the character in scientific or medical quackery.
President Trump has made definitive-sounding statements about the progress of medicine and medical research in developing a vaccine for COVID-19. Ask the experts instead, as Trump knows about as much about medicine as he does about changing the oil on a car.  

In the meantime I can avoid bars and avoid eating in the dining areas of restaurants. I can wear a mask anywhere. And, of course, I have voted early, and you can imagine how I voted.
So...my (unelected) state governor has contracted the virus. I hope he learns a lesson from this, but perhaps that is too much to hope for.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/20...GaZcEgyayM

Quote:In July, Parson criticized local governments for closing recreational facilities for children and called for schools to reopen with in-person classes. The governor told KFTK radio host Marc Cox he wasn’t concerned about students contracting the virus.

“They’re at the lowest risk possible,” Parson said. “And if they do get covid-19, which they will — and they will when they go to school — they’re not going to the hospitals. They’re not going to have to sit in doctor’s offices. They’re going to go home and they’re going to get over it.” ...

Parson has also held firm on not establishing a statewide mask mandate, which was among the recommendations from the White House coronavirus task force on how to lower his state’s infection rate. Sixteen states don’t have statewide mask mandates.
(09-17-2020, 04:51 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-16-2020, 10:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The USA had over 40,000 new cases and over a thousand new deaths today from coronavirus. The pandemic is not going away. Most people have been pretty diligent in following the rules and guidelines. I suppose maybe a relatively few skeptics and trumpers and indulgent young party animals are ruining it for everyone else. Or the ways we are trying to limit the spread of the virus just don't work. It seems they work in some places that know how to do it and don't open too soon, but some European countries have failed too, as well as India and Latin America. And in some places we don't know how it's going, because the government won't or can't keep track.

Republicans and sometimes Democrats open things up too soon, following Trump's fantasies. But now it seems too late to correct this, and the pandemic is going to be with us for a long time. They are also going to drag their feet getting the vaccine out to people, using all sorts of excuses. I hope if Biden gets in that the response will be more sane and efficient. But it is frustrating that lots of people are doing something about it and nothing ever changes. Biden's poll numbers are slowly trending downward, and enough people might like happy talk that they might settle for 4 more years of this hell.

I almost believe that we will have to do another lockdown, this one nationwide, and as rigidly as ever in all states. That most likely will be near the start of the Biden Presidency. There might even have to be fuel rationing to keep people from traveling long distances. I didn't do much long-distance driving when Michigan was under lockdown because there was nowhere to go  (because there was nothing to do except -- what-- go to a grocery store? 

We didn't quite get it right the first time, so we will probably have to start over with perhaps 300,000 people dead by then.

Maybe some of us will be delighted to watch how the Hague Tribunal treats President Trump.
I don't think you'll be able to talk Americans into another lock down these days. You might succeed with the Democratic population in some states with heavy Democratic populations like the West Coast states and the Northeastern states but you'll probably loose Minnesota. Minnesota is much more of a libertarian state than a liberal/progressive state these days.
(09-24-2020, 01:36 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-17-2020, 04:51 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-16-2020, 10:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The USA had over 40,000 new cases and over a thousand new deaths today from coronavirus. The pandemic is not going away. Most people have been pretty diligent in following the rules and guidelines. I suppose maybe a relatively few skeptics and trumpers and indulgent young party animals are ruining it for everyone else. Or the ways we are trying to limit the spread of the virus just don't work. It seems they work in some places that know how to do it and don't open too soon, but some European countries have failed too, as well as India and Latin America. And in some places we don't know how it's going, because the government won't or can't keep track.

Republicans and sometimes Democrats open things up too soon, following Trump's fantasies. But now it seems too late to correct this, and the pandemic is going to be with us for a long time. They are also going to drag their feet getting the vaccine out to people, using all sorts of excuses. I hope if Biden gets in that the response will be more sane and efficient. But it is frustrating that lots of people are doing something about it and nothing ever changes. Biden's poll numbers are slowly trending downward, and enough people might like happy talk that they might settle for 4 more years of this hell.

I almost believe that we will have to do another lockdown, this one nationwide, and as rigidly as ever in all states. That most likely will be near the start of the Biden Presidency. There might even have to be fuel rationing to keep people from traveling long distances. I didn't do much long-distance driving when Michigan was under lockdown because there was nowhere to go  (because there was nothing to do except -- what-- go to a grocery store? 

We didn't quite get it right the first time, so we will probably have to start over with perhaps 300,000 people dead by then.

Maybe some of us will be delighted to watch how the Hague Tribunal treats President Trump.
I don't think you'll be able to talk Americans into another lock down these days. You might succeed with the Democratic population in some states with heavy Democratic populations like the West Coast states and the Northeastern states but you'll probably loose Minnesota. Minnesota is much more of a libertarian state than a liberal/progressive state these days.

Minnesota has slipped back up into the likely Democratic category and has stayed there for a week or so.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pol.../national/
polling average for Sept.24, 5 PM EDT

National Biden +7.2

Arizona Biden +3.9
Colorado Biden +10.1
Florida Biden +1.6
Georgia Trump +1.1
Iowa Trump +0.8
Kansas Trump +8.9
Louisiana Trump +10.7 
Michigan Biden +7.0
Minnesota Biden +9.1
Missouri Trump +6.7
Montana Trump +8.1
Nevada Biden +5.7
New Hampshire Biden +6.8
North Carolina Biden +1.2
Ohio Trump +0.3
Pennsylvania Biden +4.6
South Carolina Trump +6.9
Texas Trump +1.9
Virginia Biden +10.1 
Wisconsin Biden +6.5

[Image: Voxo7]

+-3% toss up (gray), 3-9% leaning, 9-15% likely, 15+% solid, red=Republican blue=Democratic, Arkansas leans Republican
Most new cases reported Sept.23:

India 89,688
USA 41,616
Brazil 32,445
France 13,072
Argentina 12,625
Israel 11,316
Spain 11,289
Colombia 6731
Russia 6431
UK 6173

Most new deaths reported:
India 1152
USA 1109
Brazil 906
Mexico 651
Argentina 424

Most new cases reported in USA:
Texas 4372
California 3230
Florida 2590
Illinois 1848
Wisconsin 1762
Tennessee 1561
Georgia 1457
Missouri 1428
Kansas 1300
Oklahoma 1089

Most new deaths:
Florida 202
Texas 130
California 118
Georgia 96
Missouri 58

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/