The Coronavirus

[pbrower2a]

(04-05-2020, 01:27 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(04-05-2020, 03:26 AM)Arkarch Wrote: Just the start of an observation

Are some of our modern day "Captains of Industry" Billionaire-heads-of-corps making a play during this coronavirus crisis?   I point to two examples - One being Sheldon Adelson, owner of Las Vegas Sands Corp, who notably is protecting the income of his current employees and even the incomes of third-party employers/employees on his properties (news link below).  Another Industry Captain (I will hold name in reserve as I am an employee) is also protecting and keeping employees busy.  The advantage of such action is those companies are all using this time to work on projects and be ahead of the action when business resumes.   This is in contrast to the more stockholder-driven corps that are following the usual furlough and layoff model; and may not be able to respond as well when business resumes.   This maps to a repeating cycle that maps to the post-Civil War Captains of Industry as our institutions.  Any other Billionaire-run corps keeping their workforce up?

https://vegasinc.lasvegassun.com/busines...orkers-du/

Thanks - good observation.  If this is the start of large private corporations destroying public corporations, that could be the destruction of the concentration of power that I'd be looking for to resolve the crisis.

Edit:  not seeing how they are using these employees to get a jump on the opposition, other than being in a position to resume operations quickly.  Are you seeing something there - where they could move to take out big restaurant chains or something?

Businesses with deep pockets will be able to have employees ready to go when those businesses restart operations. They can keep skeleton staffs  keep in contact with employees who do light work (perhaps for reduced pay, but if commute costs vanish that might be worth it) and cut back on travel and lodging expenses... and energy use. That of course would not be full compensation for lost revenues. Still, there should be a mini-boom for companies swiftest to go back into business especially if those companies can raise prices at the end. 

How else are these companies to recover? They will have to raise prices to recover losses and raise funds for advertising and operations.

We have just experienced the most pervasive compromise of capitalism in American history by shutting down huge sectors of the American economy without compensation. Sure, in WWII, businesses went from profitable civilian activity to military production even more profitable. 

Whoever can start first will have an overpowering advantage over those who have terminated employees who will of course be tempted to go to competitors. Employers can preserve some good will.

[Bob Butler 54]

(04-06-2020, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Businesses with deep pockets will be able to have employees ready to go when those businesses restart operations.

This reminds me a bit of how things used to be when America was Great.  Working for the Bell System back in the day, my father used to be expected to give a bit extra in a storm, but the company would give loyalty to their employees back.  He tells the story of spending the night during a hurricane keeping the generators driving the phone system alive, leaving his late stage pregnant wife at home.  She used to tell the story from a different angle.  There seems to be much less of that in the modern telecommunications industry, with the companies trying to hire contractors if possible, thus having to pay them nothing in off peak times.

This used to be The Way.  Companies were loyal to their employees and vice versa.  A few deep pocked private companies might have an echo of it.  I don’t think you would generally assume all such owners are similar.

This might be touched by generation theory. A willingness to sacrifice to a larger entity for the sake of all can exist with other entities than the federal government. Maybe some of it might survive the Conservative time. If so, I have not seen much of it yet.

[pbrower2a]

(04-06-2020, 02:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Businesses with deep pockets will be able to have employees ready to go when those businesses restart operations.

This reminds me a bit of how things used to be when America was Great.  Working for the Bell System back in the day, my father used to be expected to give a bit extra in a storm, but the company would give loyalty to their employees back.  He tells the story of spending the night during a hurricane keeping the generators driving the phone system alive, leaving his late stage pregnant wife at home.  She used to tell the story from a different angle.  There seems to be much less of that in the modern telecommunications industry, with the companies trying to hire contractors if possible, thus having to pay them nothing in off peak times.

America was great when business treated employees well because such was not only right -- but also even good business. Then came the MBA school ethos that said that everything is money, and that the only people who matter are shareholders and executives. Such is exactly what one would expect of the greedy, materialistic young adults intent on getting ahead quick and didn't care about making themselves better as the liberal-arts program had as an objective. There was a time when the MBA degree did not exist, and people actually got their start into management (except in such businesses as retailing and restaurants from the shop floor and thus recognized that there was a human being at every work station instead of some machine in human shape. This is before robots, of course. 

Quote:This used to be The Way.  Companies were loyal to their employees and vice versa.  A few deep pocked private companies might have an echo of it.  I don’t think you would generally assume all such owners are similar.

Of course not... but the perception of what constitutes rationality changes from  one era of the cycle to the next. At some point workers will need a stake in the system if it is not to end up with sullen, resentful workers who put in just enough effort to avoid being cast onto the street. Workers treated badly become goldbricks, especially in non-growth industries. Figure that as a 1T rolls around, employee retention could be a problem in places that treat employees like dirt.  

Quote:This might be touched by generation theory.  A willingness to sacrifice to a larger entity for the sake of all can exist with other entities than the federal government.  Maybe some of it might survive the Conservative time.  If so, I have not seen much of it yet.

There is little wrong with our system that powerful unions and elected officials beholden to them can't solve. Cheap labor treated badly loses its motivation and its productivity.

[pbrower2a]

[pbrower2a]

An ominous trend:

More than half of Chicago’s coronavirus cases are in African American community, city officials say

(Chicago Tribune)

[/url]



Chicago public health commissioner Dr. Allison Arwady outlined the city’s grim coronavirus statistics along racial lines. Although only 30% of the city is black, more than half of Chicago’s COVID-19 cases have hit African Americans, and 72% of the dead were black, Arwady said.

That’s driven in part by already-existing inequities, Arwady said. In Chicago, there’s an 8.8 year life expectancy gap between white and black residents, largely driven by chronic disease, she said.
But it’s also driven by economic disinvestment and other issues on the city’s South and West Sides, Arwady said.

[url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-chicago-coronavirus-deaths-demographics-lightfoot-20200406-77nlylhiavgjzb2wa4ckivh7mu-story.html]https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-chicago-coronavirus-deaths-demographics-lightfoot-20200406-77nlylhiavgjzb2wa4ckivh7mu-story.html

[beechnut79]

Too bad most of us can’t read but snippets of these stories because of paywalls.

[Arkarch]

(04-06-2020, 04:31 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 02:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Businesses with deep pockets will be able to have employees ready to go when those businesses restart operations.

This reminds me a bit of how things used to be when America was Great.  Working for the Bell System back in the day, my father used to be expected to give a bit extra in a storm, but the company would give loyalty to their employees back.  He tells the story of spending the night during a hurricane keeping the generators driving the phone system alive, leaving his late stage pregnant wife at home.  She used to tell the story from a different angle.  There seems to be much less of that in the modern telecommunications industry, with the companies trying to hire contractors if possible, thus having to pay them nothing in off peak times.

America was great when business treated employees well because such was not only right -- but also even good business. Then came the MBA school ethos that said that everything is money, and that the only people who matter are shareholders and executives. Such is exactly what one would expect of the greedy, materialistic young adults intent on getting ahead quick and didn't care about making themselves better as the liberal-arts program had as an objective. There was a time when the MBA degree did not exist, and people actually got their start into management (except in such businesses as retailing and restaurants from the shop floor and thus recognized that there was a human being at every work station instead of some machine in human shape. This is before robots, of course. 

Quote:This used to be The Way.  Companies were loyal to their employees and vice versa.  A few deep pocked private companies might have an echo of it.  I don’t think you would generally assume all such owners are similar.

Of course not... but the perception of what constitutes rationality changes from  one era of the cycle to the next. At some point workers will need a stake in the system if it is not to end up with sullen, resentful workers who put in just enough effort to avoid being cast onto the street. Workers treated badly become goldbricks, especially in non-growth industries. Figure that as a 1T rolls around, employee retention could be a problem in places that treat employees like dirt.  

Quote:This might be touched by generation theory.  A willingness to sacrifice to a larger entity for the sake of all can exist with other entities than the federal government.  Maybe some of it might survive the Conservative time.  If so, I have not seen much of it yet.

There is little wrong with our system that powerful unions and elected officials beholden to them can't solve. Cheap labor treated badly loses its motivation and its productivity.

A company that is doing its best to protect its employees from the burden of the moment I believe is a big positive.  While I did bring up the Sheldon Adelson Las Vegas Sands case which is service oriented; the other case I noted is a B2B technology business also primarily owned by a deep pocket Billionaire. To add thoughts as to why continuing operations provides an advantage -  Building and retaining an experienced and talented employee base is critical for the future.  In addition, a technology company that stays productive can advance their products during this time.  Relationships with customers are also kept intact, ready to support during the gap and especially when the customers need to come back up.  These are all common sense benefits that may be lost in the current MBA corporate-think.   Thank-you for the thoughts - this may indeed have impact on the composition of our next 1T.

[pbrower2a]

(04-07-2020, 06:05 AM)Arkarch Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 04:31 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 02:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-06-2020, 11:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Businesses with deep pockets will be able to have employees ready to go when those businesses restart operations.

This reminds me a bit of how things used to be when America was Great.  Working for the Bell System back in the day, my father used to be expected to give a bit extra in a storm, but the company would give loyalty to their employees back.  He tells the story of spending the night during a hurricane keeping the generators driving the phone system alive, leaving his late stage pregnant wife at home.  She used to tell the story from a different angle.  There seems to be much less of that in the modern telecommunications industry, with the companies trying to hire contractors if possible, thus having to pay them nothing in off peak times.

America was great when business treated employees well because such was not only right -- but also even good business. Then came the MBA school ethos that said that everything is money, and that the only people who matter are shareholders and executives. Such is exactly what one would expect of the greedy, materialistic young adults intent on getting ahead quick and didn't care about making themselves better as the liberal-arts program had as an objective. There was a time when the MBA degree did not exist, and people actually got their start into management (except in such businesses as retailing and restaurants from the shop floor and thus recognized that there was a human being at every work station instead of some machine in human shape. This is before robots, of course. 

Quote:This used to be The Way.  Companies were loyal to their employees and vice versa.  A few deep pocked private companies might have an echo of it.  I don’t think you would generally assume all such owners are similar.

Of course not... but the perception of what constitutes rationality changes from  one era of the cycle to the next. At some point workers will need a stake in the system if it is not to end up with sullen, resentful workers who put in just enough effort to avoid being cast onto the street. Workers treated badly become goldbricks, especially in non-growth industries. Figure that as a 1T rolls around, employee retention could be a problem in places that treat employees like dirt.  

Quote:This might be touched by generation theory.  A willingness to sacrifice to a larger entity for the sake of all can exist with other entities than the federal government.  Maybe some of it might survive the Conservative time.  If so, I have not seen much of it yet.

There is little wrong with our system that powerful unions and elected officials beholden to them can't solve. Cheap labor treated badly loses its motivation and its productivity.

A company that is doing its best to protect its employees from the burden of the moment I believe is a big positive.  While I did bring up the Sheldon Adelson Las Vegas Sands case which is service oriented; the other case I noted is a B2B technology business also primarily owned by a deep pocket Billionaire.   To add thoughts as to why continuing operations provides an advantage -  Building and retaining an experienced and talented employee base is critical for the future.  In addition, a technology company that stays productive can advance their products during this time.  Relationships with customers are also kept intact, ready to support during the gap and especially when the customers need to come back up.  These are all common sense benefits that may be lost in the current MBA corporate-think.   Thank-you for the thoughts - this may indeed have impact on the composition of our next 1T.

Ordinarily I have despised Sheldon Adelson for his politics and his business (gambling)... but when he does something good one must praise him.  Figure that management-labor relations have gone into the toilet since Reagan became President, and that Big Business has gotten away with callous treatment of workers that would have been possible only on the economic fringe from the late 1940's to the late 1970's. Figure that the optimum for an employer  for keeping wages down and labor discipline severe is to ensure that people already employed know that someone on the outside wants to take his job. Such was the norm in industrial sweatshops in which the work was easy to learn and in places of extreme poverty (think of the slums full of Italian and Jewish immigrants about 120 years ago).  It also applied to retailing and fast food, which revived that old norm. 

Employees became expendable in the 1980's equivalents of sweat-shops... and other industries sought to imitate that model. It has its costs. One is that one's firm might attract talented people able, when things change, to shake things up to meet changing realities of the marketplace. That a fast-food place or a boutique store in a mall could occasionally hire someone with a college degree to work for a near-minimum wage has not resulted in such hires sticking around. I remember working in a department store for a little over two years and hearing people who worked there say things such as "I just don't want to be a secretary". Within a few weeks that person was in secretarial school. Or I heard "I don't want to work in a factory". A factory started hiring, and that person left for the factory.

If you want to know what happened to Sears (which will probably reopen its remaining stores for liquidation sales)... Sears used to have formal management training for promising people. It stopped that. It might get talented persons as workers for a time and it would fail to recognize what was there. Maybe Sears could have done better had it developed information technology as did Wal*Mart, as there was little divide between customers of Sears and Wal*Mart. Sears started bringing in shoddier merchandise to turn quicker profits... which is a huge mistake. Upgrading one's wares is good business; downgrading one's wares debases the firm. Employees there recognized that they had no future except more of the same poverty and work that teaches nothing stuck around only if they were incompetent to do something else.  

Every business and every non-profit bureaucracy makes decisions, even if the decision is the weakest of all (drift). Sears drifted into ruin. A company like Sears could fare adequately (as can any retailer) if it has well-heeled customers able to buy the stuff that it sells. As real wages fell, the well-heeled customers also disappeared. There go the sales revenues while costs keep rising.  From such comes bankruptcy.

America will get out of the economic downturn related in part to COVID-19 and in part to the collapse of the Obama-Trump bull market. There is pent-up demand. People will want to go places and do things that they miss doing. Companies that have closed their doors will still need skeleton staffs just to re-start should the current lock-down end within six months.  COVID-19 will run its course or medical science will find ways to stop it -- maybe through immunization with antibodies from the fluids of survivors.

It will be a good idea to develop new and improved products and services. People out of work might as well develop some new work skills if they saw themselves either consigned to the same old poverty in a workplace in which they can learn nothing or are overworked and underpaid. Something else is happening, and this may be the reality ready to strike advanced industrial societies: we are at the end of the era in which productive scarcity allows people to get rich by meeting it. We can no longer simply make stuff and sell it so that people can be happier. We can produce in much less than 40 hours what we used to produce in 40. So what are we doing in the surplus hours? The 40-hour workweek may become obsolete.

[Bob Butler 54]

(04-07-2020, 07:46 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: It will be a good idea to develop new and improved products and services. People out of work might as well develop some new work skills if they saw themselves either consigned to the same old poverty in a workplace in which they can learn nothing or are overworked and underpaid. Something else is happening, and this may be the reality ready to strike advanced industrial societies: we are at the end of the era in which productive scarcity allows people to get rich by meeting it. We can no longer simply make stuff and sell it so that people can be happier. We can produce in much less than 40 hours what we used to produce in 40. So what are we doing in the surplus hours? The 40-hour workweek may become obsolete.

In the time of the New Deal, the 40 hour work week while retiring at 65 was about right.  Since then, productivity has increased drastically through automation and computers, but we have continued as is.  Among other things, division of wealth has increased vastly and labor is no longer a critical resource.  

As a way of distributing wealth and resources, using labor needs serious adjustment.  We should figure out how much labor we need, how many people need wealth distributed, and adjust the length of the work week and retirement age appropriately.  As is we pay others to make coffee for us, and to mow our lawns, and call it progress.

The Coronavirus has shown us that we can live in the Information Age.  Smaller population.  Much less labor.  Much less travel.  Much less energy used.  Very green.  It did it in a clumsy way.  We cannot sustain it as we are doing it now.  But, in a lot of ways we are being given a glimpse of the future.  The new normal will be quite different.

Basically, we have a consumer culture.  We artificially increased production, reduced wages, spread manufacturing jobs world wide, and given the wealth to the elites.  The whole dynamic of this has to be rethought.

[David Horn]

(04-07-2020, 10:29 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-07-2020, 07:46 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: It will be a good idea to develop new and improved products and services. People out of work might as well develop some new work skills if they saw themselves either consigned to the same old poverty in a workplace in which they can learn nothing or are overworked and underpaid. Something else is happening, and this may be the reality ready to strike advanced industrial societies: we are at the end of the era in which productive scarcity allows people to get rich by meeting it. We can no longer simply make stuff and sell it so that people can be happier. We can produce in much less than 40 hours what we used to produce in 40. So what are we doing in the surplus hours? The 40-hour workweek may become obsolete.

In the time of the New Deal, the 40 hour work week while retiring at 65 was about right.  Since then, productivity has increased drastically through automation and computers, but we have continued as is.  Among other things, division of wealth has increased vastly and labor is no longer a critical resource.  

As a way of distributing wealth and resources, using labor needs serious adjustment.  We should figure out how much labor we need, how many people need wealth distributed, and adjust the length of the work week and retirement age appropriately.  As is we pay others to make coffee for us, and to mow our lawns, and call it progress.

The Coronavirus has shown us that we can live in the Information Age.  Smaller population.  Much less labor.  Much less travel.  Much less energy used.  Very green.  It did it in a clumsy way.  We cannot sustain it as we are doing it now.  But, in a lot of ways we are being given a glimpse of the future.  The new normal will be quite different.

Basically, we have a consumer culture.  We artificially increased production, reduced wages, spread manufacturing jobs world wide, and given the wealth to the elites.  The whole dynamic of this has to be rethought.

Even without Information Age technology, we should be well below the 40 hour week -- not dramatically higher as we have been.  Sorry, but working 60-80 hours a week is not a sign of dedication and perseverance.  It's a sign that the oligarchs won.  It's long pastime for that to reverse.

John Maynard Keynes was asked what he predicted would be the typical work environment at the turn of the millennium.  He guessed that efficiency improvement should lead to 15 hour weeks and 8 weeks of paid vacation. Should, but didn't.

[pbrower2a]

(04-07-2020, 01:36 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-07-2020, 10:29 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-07-2020, 07:46 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: It will be a good idea to develop new and improved products and services. People out of work might as well develop some new work skills if they saw themselves either consigned to the same old poverty in a workplace in which they can learn nothing or are overworked and underpaid. Something else is happening, and this may be the reality ready to strike advanced industrial societies: we are at the end of the era in which productive scarcity allows people to get rich by meeting it. We can no longer simply make stuff and sell it so that people can be happier. We can produce in much less than 40 hours what we used to produce in 40. So what are we doing in the surplus hours? The 40-hour workweek may become obsolete.

In the time of the New Deal, the 40 hour work week while retiring at 65 was about right.  Since then, productivity has increased drastically through automation and computers, but we have continued as is.  Among other things, division of wealth has increased vastly and labor is no longer a critical resource.  

As a way of distributing wealth and resources, using labor needs serious adjustment.  We should figure out how much labor we need, how many people need wealth distributed, and adjust the length of the work week and retirement age appropriately.  As is we pay others to make coffee for us, and to mow our lawns, and call it progress.

The Coronavirus has shown us that we can live in the Information Age.  Smaller population.  Much less labor.  Much less travel.  Much less energy used.  Very green.  It did it in a clumsy way.  We cannot sustain it as we are doing it now.  But, in a lot of ways we are being given a glimpse of the future.  The new normal will be quite different.

Basically, we have a consumer culture.  We artificially increased production, reduced wages, spread manufacturing jobs world wide, and given the wealth to the elites.  The whole dynamic of this has to be rethought.

Even without Information Age technology, we should be well below the 40 hour week -- not dramatically higher as we have been.  Sorry, but working 60-80 hours a week is not a sign of dedication and perseverance.  It's a sign that the oligarchs won.  It's long pastime for that to reverse.

John Maynard Keynes was asked what he predicted would be the typical work environment at the turn of the millennium.  He guessed that efficiency improvement should lead to 15 hour weeks and 8 weeks of paid vacation. Should, but didn't.

We can't predict the death toll for COVID-19. We do not know yet whether it has lasting effects upon survivors as some other infectious diseases (strep throat, rheumatic fever, syphilis, gonorrhea) have. Maybe the disease will peter out, and maybe we will get some effective means of prevention such as inoculating people with antibodies. 

My seat-of-the-pants estimate of how dangerous COVID-19 is, of all things, drunk driving. The drunk may be lucky... or he may not be.   

Information technology is not so much a matter of doing more as it is of doping some things better. In retailing, information technology allows merchants to stop buying stuff that does not sell -- like clothes of the wrong size. This keeps stores from having remainder racks full of stuff that will take months to sell at a huge discount.  It allows people to decide what they want instead of a merchant putting stuff on a rack and hoping that it sells. So if I want to buy  a certain performance of a work of classical music I can buy it instead of having to wait until it comes to 'my nearest store'. 

But that is retail and other marketing. The old saying was "sell what you have because orders are tricky"... that is past.  

People working harder and longer for less despite higher productivity is either waste or exploitation. The Thatcher-Reagan meme that exploitation is a means of achieving profit, the only measure of progress, may be imploding.

[pbrower2a]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

[Bob Butler 54]

It seems I am not the only one picturing Mother Nature plotting against humanity.   Via CNN...

Quote:Pope Francis has said the coronavirus pandemic is one of "nature's responses" to humans ignoring the current ecological crisis.

In an email interview published Wednesday in The Tablet and Commonwealth magazines, the pontiff said the outbreak offered an opportunity to slow down the rate of production and consumption and to learn to understand and contemplate the natural world.

[Bob Butler 54]

I have been having my handyman pick up groceries every week or two.  Today he came in with an account of people and grocery workers both developing a hostile confrontational attitude.  I have heard that in a few cases nationwide people have spit into produce causing thousands of dollars of supplies being thrown away.  The police are apparently charging it as attempted murder.  I have also heard of hoarding complaints.  The stores have responded with increased monitoring of shoppers, and of picking out of items being purchased if they think someone is hoarding.  In my case, the husband and wife team were shopping for two households, and thus they bought two of some items.  The store employee grabbed into their carts at the self checkout without explanation or permission and a manager had to be called.

Just as soon avoid that scene.

Is it just the Plymouth Massachusetts area?  Are others seeing this?

The idea in The Theory that people would let go of the unraveling selfish attitudes and bind together in a national cause seems reportedly to be missing.

[Bob Butler 54]

The CDC has released new guidelines for keeping critical workers working through the crisis.  They seem similar to what would be needed to restart the economy after the worst of the peeks has passed.  I am curious if anyone thinks they are overkill?

[Ragnarök_62]

(04-09-2020, 12:13 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The CDC has released new guidelines for keeping critical workers working through the crisis.  They seem similar to what would be needed to restart the economy after the worst of the peeks has passed.  I am curious if anyone thinks they are overkill?

Nope,  the CDC hasn't mandated anything. It's wrong in determining who has the virus.  So where's mention of testing?  I think the mandate should be workers are allowed to be at work, if they test negative for Corona Virus. I'd also add an strict enforcement regime with stiff fines and jail time for  business owners who violate this mandate.  Like a scaled fine schedule.  The fine must hurt whoever violates it in the best place, the bottom line.

[Bob Butler 54]

(04-09-2020, 01:25 AM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(04-09-2020, 12:13 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The CDC has released new guidelines for keeping critical workers working through the crisis.  They seem similar to what would be needed to restart the economy after the worst of the peeks has passed.  I am curious if anyone thinks they are overkill?

Nope,  the CDC hasn't mandated anything. It's wrong in determining who has the virus.  So where's mention of testing?  I think the mandate should be workers are allowed to be at work, if they test negative for Corona Virus. I'd also add an strict enforcement regime with stiff fines and jail time for  business owners who violate this mandate.  Like a scaled fine schedule.  The fine must hurt whoever violates it in the best place, the bottom line.

Correct.  These are someone from the deep state making their own wishes wistfully public, where it should be someone from the administration, likely the president himself, making it official and punishable.  Testing is one of the things that should be required, among other things.

[Bob Butler 54]

CNN Reports Pence's office blocks public health officials from appearing on CNN

Is this a violation of free speech?  It targets a specific group of individuals from accessing a particular media resource, but it looks that way.  

I know that in military actions you block secrets and similarly corporations often protect trade secrets, but has anyone heard of it applied to medical policies?

[Classic-Xer]

(04-09-2020, 03:23 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: CNN Reports Pence's office blocks public health officials from appearing on CNN

Is this a violation of free speech?  It targets a specific group of individuals from accessing a particular media resource, but it looks that way.  

I know that in military actions you block secrets and similarly corporations often protect trade secrets, but has anyone heard of it applied to medical policies?

I amazed that you don't know the answer to the question. I know it but I'm not going to give the answer. It's pretty easy.

[Classic-Xer]

(04-09-2020, 04:48 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-09-2020, 01:25 AM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(04-09-2020, 12:13 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: The CDC has released new guidelines for keeping critical workers working through the crisis.  They seem similar to what would be needed to restart the economy after the worst of the peeks has passed.  I am curious if anyone thinks they are overkill?

Nope,  the CDC hasn't mandated anything. It's wrong in determining who has the virus.  So where's mention of testing?  I think the mandate should be workers are allowed to be at work, if they test negative for Corona Virus. I'd also add an strict enforcement regime with stiff fines and jail time for  business owners who violate this mandate.  Like a scaled fine schedule.  The fine must hurt whoever violates it in the best place, the bottom line.

Correct.  These are someone from the deep state making their own wishes wistfully public, where it should be someone from the administration, likely the president himself, making it official and punishable.  Testing is one of the things that should be required, among other things.

We don't have testing kits for us yet. The testing kits are all on the front line right now. We have friends who are nurses who work for healthcare clinics. They aren't accepting covid19 patients yet. So, we are pretty on our own at this point.