The Coronavirus

[Eric the Green]

(04-13-2020, 11:36 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: CNN evaluates a conspiracy theory that the Coronavirus was created in the lab.  The scientists are skeptical of the claim.

Scientific reports are definitely what we should look at, not conspiracy theory, when seeking for explanations about such factual matters.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00548-w

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...175442.htm

[Bob Butler 54]

(04-13-2020, 12:54 PM)David Horn Wrote: And as you said, along came Coronavirus.  Can we agree that the threat is adequately serious? If so, then is this a reasonable proxy for the war we wish to avoid?  Can we rally to the cause?  So far, it has the feel of a proxy civil war, with each "side" having apoplexy about the other side's plan to solve the crisis.  It's an odd configuration, with the virus on one side, and the competing political actors arrayed against one another on the other side.

Is this the new crisis modality?

I think the progressives at least and most sane conservatives not in the White House would agree that the threat is serious.  

The progressive definition of the new values is generally one side of the debate that goes on seemingly endlessly in the Unravelling and pre Trigger Crisis.  Eventually, the Trigger causes the debate in the legislature to end, and the progressive agenda as discussed in the debate is put in place and then some in the Crisis.

This time around, the federals are not responding to the Trigger, and right now the progressive agenda is being defined primarily by the regional alliances of governors on either coast.  Trump seems too ready to claim the Buchanan and Hoover role, showing the old values to not work well.  (Understatement.)  This could change with a hypothetical Biden inauguration in 2021, and move to address other issues.

I have always wondered if the Grey Champions have greatness in them, or if they are forced into greatness by the issues of the time, sanctified when they turn out to be right after all.  I guess we will find out with Biden taking charge.

[Eric the Green]

Apparently the virus may be exposing the inadequacy of the neo-liberal trickle-down approach and Trump that he might lose in November, and bring down the senate with him, and then there's a chance progress will re-start and the more long-term crises can be addressed. But the red-blue civil war will erupt again if any Democratic administration is elected, because it will enact gun control, it will raise taxes, it will reverse social conservatism, and the fanatic right-wing will violently resist.

[Bob Butler 54]

(04-13-2020, 10:39 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Apparently the virus may be exposing the inadequacy of the neo-liberal trickle-down approach and Trump that he might lose in November, and bring down the senate with him, and then there's a chance progress will re-start and the more long-term crises can be addressed. But the red-blue civil war will erupt again if any Democratic administration is elected, because it will enact gun control, it will raise taxes, it will reverse social conservatism, and the fanatic right-wing will violently resist.

Maybe.  The Supreme Court will still be conservative, and will enforce the original interpretation of the Second Amendment.  The gun prohibition should be kept to closing the loopholes in attempted guards against felons and insane.  The need to raise taxes after the Coronavirus economic legislations should be obvious even to a conservative.  If Biden is forced to lead, maybe he can keep a grip on the country.

We’ll see.

[Eric the Green]

(04-14-2020, 07:49 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-13-2020, 10:39 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Apparently the virus may be exposing the inadequacy of the neo-liberal trickle-down approach and Trump that he might lose in November, and bring down the senate with him, and then there's a chance progress will re-start and the more long-term crises can be addressed. But the red-blue civil war will erupt again if any Democratic administration is elected, because it will enact gun control, it will raise taxes, it will reverse social conservatism, and the fanatic right-wing will violently resist.

Maybe.  The Supreme Court will still be conservative, and will enforce the original interpretation of the Second Amendment.  The gun prohibition should be kept to closing the loopholes in attempted guards against felons and insane.  The need to raise taxes after the Coronavirus economic legislations should be obvious even to a conservative.  If Biden is forced to lead, maybe he can keep a grip on the country.

We’ll see.

The gun control proposals that have been made in recent years and stopped by a vote or two are going to be passed if Democrats gain control. That may well include a ban on military weapons in civilian hands, and big magazines; the kinds of weapons used for mass shootings. Or it may not go that far. Regardless, the fanatics will rebel. I don't know how much faith the violent right-wing gun toters have in the Supreme Court though to do their bidding. I know they fiercely oppose the proposals that have been made, and I expect that the previous Scalia Court would have ruled these proposals as constitutional, based on previous rulings.

The right-wing conservatives in this country still hold that Trump is doing a good job. That's 45% of national poll respondents. So how many of them will be persuaded after the virus crisis is passed to support higher taxes remains to be seen. It won't take too many shifting left to get Democrats into office, but so many of them are so extreme that a right-wing rebellion may still erupt. Such an event does not need a majority of voters in order to happen.

[David Horn]

(04-13-2020, 10:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: … This time around, the federals are not responding to the Trigger, and right now the progressive agenda is being defined primarily by the regional alliances of governors on either coast.  Trump seems too ready to claim the Buchanan and Hoover role, showing the old values to not work well.  (Understatement.) This could change with a hypothetical Biden inauguration in 2021, and move to address other issues.

I have always wondered if the Grey Champions have greatness in them, or if they are forced into greatness by the issues of the time, sanctified when they turn out to be right after all.  I guess we will find out with Biden taking charge.

I don't see Biden in the Lincoln/FDR role at all. Yes, he'll do a good job reuniting the country (at east as much as it can be), but he doesn't have the personality needed to lead in times like these. Considering his age, his VP should be the candidate in 2024 -- unless he goes with a play safe choice there as well. If so, count on a vigorous challenge from the New Democrats (name tbd later). If either case fails, and the safe-choice VP continues on, this 4T will be a failure.

[David Horn]

(04-14-2020, 07:49 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(04-13-2020, 10:39 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Apparently the virus may be exposing the inadequacy of the neo-liberal trickle-down approach and Trump that he might lose in November, and bring down the senate with him, and then there's a chance progress will re-start and the more long-term crises can be addressed. But the red-blue civil war will erupt again if any Democratic administration is elected, because it will enact gun control, it will raise taxes, it will reverse social conservatism, and the fanatic right-wing will violently resist.

Maybe.  The Supreme Court will still be conservative, and will enforce the original interpretation of the Second Amendment.  The gun prohibition should be kept to closing the loopholes in attempted guards against felons and insane.  The need to raise taxes after the Coronavirus economic legislations should be obvious even to a conservative.  If Biden is forced to lead, maybe he can keep a grip on the country.

We’ll see.

Here's where an neo-FDR would step up.  McConnell loaded the courts.  The correct response is adding seats to the SCOTUS.  But if you're going to do it, do it right:  add 6!

[Eric the Green]

(04-14-2020, 02:41 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-13-2020, 10:07 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: … This time around, the federals are not responding to the Trigger, and right now the progressive agenda is being defined primarily by the regional alliances of governors on either coast.  Trump seems too ready to claim the Buchanan and Hoover role, showing the old values to not work well.  (Understatement.) This could change with a hypothetical Biden inauguration in 2021, and move to address other issues.

I have always wondered if the Grey Champions have greatness in them, or if they are forced into greatness by the issues of the time, sanctified when they turn out to be right after all.  I guess we will find out with Biden taking charge.

I don't see Biden in the Lincoln/FDR role at all.  Yes, he'll do a good job reuniting the country (at east as much as it can be), but he doesn't have the personality needed to lead in times like these. Considering his age, his VP should be the candidate in 2024 -- unless he goes with a play safe choice there as well. If so, count on a vigorous challenge from the New Democrats (name tbd later).  If either case fails, and the safe-choice VP continues on, this 4T will be a failure.

Probably right on all counts. However, as I pointed out, although leadership is needed for a successful 4T, it may also depend on congress and the people. If they get woke, success is possible even under a mediocre president like Biden. And he has seriously limited his veep choices. None of the women being considered could beat Trump, so the Republicans would have to put up a weak candidate for even the best women choices out there now to win in 2024.

McAuliffe would be an excellent center-left choice, if that's what the people want. If he ever runs I predict that he would win, and Mitch Landrieu would be even better I think.

[Bob Butler 54]

CNN reports Trump is withholding funding to the World Health Organization, in part due to their handling of the Coronavirus.  

I would think most would think it is Trump who bungled.

[Eric the Green]

Trying to deflect blame from himself by harming others. Typical Trump modus operandi. Makes my blood boil a bit. It will make the virus spread more widely, and thus hurt ourselves.

[Bob Butler 54]

I found a site with statistics by country on the Coronavirus.  They had a column of deaths per 1M population, among many others.  Now, this is an alternate way of looking at things from the way the coastal media generally presents it.  They generally show total deaths or total cases, without accounting for the size of the country.  This one might be more like gun deaths.  In order to compare countries, you have to take into account the country’s size.  A much reduced version in deaths per million…

China: 2
France: 241
Germany: 42
Italy: 348
UK: 178
USA: 79

If you look at it this way, the US comes out OK, where some European countries do not.  China… is just big.  It has a very large population.  I can see, though, why some are looking at their numbers and raising eyebrows.

[Eric the Green]

Yes, the chart shows more than total cases. I have pointed out though, that national borders are arbitrary. It's just one way of looking at it. New York state by itself has more deaths than any single country, and it's not very big compared to the other countries. The USA is a big country, and those who live in wide open spaces are less vulnerable to the contagion, at least initially. If they follow Trump's directive, though, in the long run they could face catastrophe due to their lack of services.

It would be more accurate to divide the big countries into regions and compare them to the "regions" that are the states in the EU, for example, or to the UK. China has a very low rate per capita, but the province in which Wuhan is located has a very high rate, and the virus was extremely contagious there. One reason China did better than the USA is that they contained not only the country by restricting foreigners, but early on contained the province by restricting travel in and out of it. Something blue states may need to learn from if they decide not to follow Trump's orders.

[Warren Dew]

It would have been better if the WHO had not ignored Taiwan early on, yes.

[Eric the Green]

(04-14-2020, 11:25 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It would have been better if the WHO had not ignored Taiwan early on, yes.

Why?

Taiwan: 
total cases, 393
total deaths: 6
total cases per million: 17
total deaths per million: 0.3

[Bob Butler 54]

Somebody out and said it...  As CNN reports...

Quote:An Indiana congressman said Tuesday that letting more Americans die from the novel coronavirus is the "lesser of two evils" compared with the economy cratering due to social distancing measures.

Speaking with radio station WIBC in Indiana, Republican Rep. Trey Hollingsworth asserted that, while he appreciated the science behind the virus' spread, "it is always the American government's position to say, in the choice between the loss of our way of life as Americans and the loss of life, of American lives, we have to always choose the latter."

[Warren Dew]

(04-14-2020, 11:49 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-14-2020, 11:25 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It would have been better if the WHO had not ignored Taiwan early on, yes.

Why?

Taiwan: 
total cases, 393
total deaths: 6
total cases per million: 17
total deaths per million: 0.3

Those are excellent statistics, no?  You think the WHO was correct to ignore that, thus depriving the rest of the world of the information on how to do it?

[David Horn]

(04-14-2020, 11:25 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It would have been better if the WHO had not ignored Taiwan early on, yes.

Taiwan waved a red flag in warning, and the WHO either ignored it or kowtowed to Beijing.  So yes, the WHO is far from blameless.  On the other hand, we already knew the virus was bad and did nothing for 2 months (nominal China travel ban notwithstanding). Let's focus a little closer to home, and fix that.

[David Horn]

(04-15-2020, 08:50 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(04-14-2020, 11:49 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-14-2020, 11:25 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It would have been better if the WHO had not ignored Taiwan early on, yes.

Why?

Taiwan: 
total cases, 393
total deaths: 6
total cases per million: 17
total deaths per million: 0.3

Those are excellent statistics, no?  You think the WHO was correct to ignore that, thus depriving the rest of the world of the information on how to do it?

Th primary Taiwan info that was ignored (or banned -- your choice), involved data on human-to-human transmission.

[Bob Butler 54]

Today I got an extra tax refund, according to my bank.  I assume it is the stimulus money.  I traditionally have them direct deposit into my bank to save a trip.  It also saves me from looking at Trump's signature?

According to CNN, a bunch of Trump's big business allies have told him what his medical experts have said many times.  You cannot reopen the economy without testing.  Maybe eventually he will listen?  

On another front, CNN reports on a French study (a bit small to be a conclusive one) showed Hydroxycloroquine doesn't help against Coronavirus, but induces significant heart problems.  This is one of the drugs Trump has been pushing as a cure.

[David Horn]

(04-15-2020, 03:49 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Today I got an extra tax refund, according to my bank.  I assume it is the stimulus money.  I traditionally have them direct deposit into my bank to save a trip.  It also saves me from looking at Trump's signature?

According to CNN, a bunch of Trump's big business allies have told him what his medical experts have said many times.  You cannot reopen the economy without testing.  Maybe eventually he will listen?  

On another front, CNN reports on a French study (a bit small to be a conclusive one) showed Hydroxycloroquine doesn't help against Coronavirus, but induces significant heart problems.  This is one of the drugs Trump has been pushing as a cure.

We also got our stimulus money in electronic form. It's amazing to me that Trump is actually getting his signature on the hard checks.