By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Snoopy said:
Peh said:


Symptons can be minor (stay at home) or critical (stay at the hospital). You can also have very slight to no symptoms, at all. Yet, all of them do spread the virus.

So, do you let sick people go to work and risk an infection of all your employees?

Isn't that exactly what is going to happened no matter what?

No. With a lockdown, you try to keep the infection rate as low as possible so your hospitals don't run out of space. Otherwise, everyone who is in a critical health state can't be treated and will highly likely die. Death rates will be way way higher by then. And with more people getting infected and more people dying, your state will shutdown at some point affecting everyone.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3 (Vive Pro 2 pre-ordered!!!)

Around the Network
Snoopy said:
jason1637 said:

No were starting to reopen because states have enough ppe and other suppliers to make sure their healthcare system isn't overun. We needed the lockdown to buy us time ao our systems can handle the influx of people so less people can die.

And it doesn't matter if these people had underling issues they are still people and deserve the rigjt to life and we shouldn't throw them under the bus. You can believe in  natural selection if you want but because of the lockdowns states were able to be better equipped to handle "natural selection ".

Hospitals are still and always will be overrun thanks to ridiculous government regulations put in the first place with or without lockdown. There is no way around this issue unless the government ends a lot of these silly over the top laws and don't embrace the free market. This is why healthcare is so expensive in the first place.

Well they are in a much better position now. More PPE, ventilaters, beds etc.



jason1637 said:
Snoopy said:

Hospitals are still and always will be overrun thanks to ridiculous government regulations put in the first place with or without lockdown. There is no way around this issue unless the government ends a lot of these silly over the top laws and don't embrace the free market. This is why healthcare is so expensive in the first place.

Well they are in a much better position now. More PPE, ventilaters, beds etc.

Nope, they are going to be in a much worse position because the economy tanked which leads to more people going to doctors/hospital due to many issues such as and not limited to  mental issues, stress heart attacks, people prolonging issues, ect. Not to mention people won't be able to pay their bills causing hospitals to bleed resources.



Snoopy said:
jason1637 said:

Well they are in a much better position now. More PPE, ventilaters, beds etc.

Nope, they are going to be in a much worse position because the economy tanked which leads to more people going to doctors/hospital due to many issues such as and not limited to  mental issues, stress heart attacks, people prolonging issues, ect. Not to mention people won't be able to pay their bills causing hospitals to bleed resources.

Well according to the CDC no such thing happened during the last recession. Rates stayed flat.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db182.htm



jason1637 said:
Snoopy said:

Nope, they are going to be in a much worse position because the economy tanked which leads to more people going to doctors/hospital due to many issues such as and not limited to  mental issues, stress heart attacks, people prolonging issues, ect. Not to mention people won't be able to pay their bills causing hospitals to bleed resources.

Well according to the CDC no such thing happened during the last recession. Rates stayed flat.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db182.htm

https://www.pnas.org/content/106/41/17290

And here's an article about how the great depression didn't affect mortality other than suicides increasing, but overall deaths were actually down and population health was up. 

It makes intuitive sense to say that economic turmoil could cause more deaths than Covid, and that's why leaders who don't want to deal with this pandemic like to repeat that claim over and over again but I've yet to see evidence of such a claim. 



...

Around the Network

Snoopy said:
Since we are now opening the economy back up slowly, I guess we can say this lockdown is pretty much pointless.

It reduced the number of deaths, and it gave states time to prepare by creating more tests. 

Not to mention a big point of this was to make the curve less steep. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgBla7RepXU
"Even if the same number of people get sick in either case, the lower curve will have fewer deaths because we have more resources for those that are sick at each time"

Snoopy said:

Okay, a lot less than a percent. Glad we are destroying everything for a death rate that is about the same as every day tasks like driving a car and walking down the street.

This is so ridiculously wrong that it physically hurts.  

1.) That isn't how diseases work.

2.) That isn't how death rates work.

3.) That isn't how anything works.  

I do not understand how you can be so lacking of even a basic understanding of statistics, mathematics.  

It has a ~1% death rate. Diseases spread exponentially. Car accidents do not.  

Snoopy said:

Dude imagine the hundreds of millions of people losing everything and possibly going homeless. Not to mention the suicides, anxiety, heart attacks from financial stress, and death from the increase in criminal activities, ect. Whether you like it or not, the economy has a bigger impact on people lives than the coronavirus.

Snoopy said:

Which will break the economy eventually and we will all suffer and have a higher number of deaths. Natural selection sucks ass, but this is exactly what is happening. Most people who are dying are those with weak immune system, elderly or a critical pre condition. However, we can't bring everyone down because eventually we will run out supplies and money. Politicans are starting to understand this and that is why they are now starting to reopen.

Or you know we could have a competent support system so that we can manage to save lives without damaging the economy.  

Or having a competent response to the pandemic to avoid it in the first place.  



Torillian said:
jason1637 said:

Well according to the CDC no such thing happened during the last recession. Rates stayed flat.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db182.htm

https://www.pnas.org/content/106/41/17290

And here's an article about how the great depression didn't affect mortality other than suicides increasing, but overall deaths were actually down and population health was up. 

It makes intuitive sense to say that economic turmoil could cause more deaths than Covid, and that's why leaders who don't want to deal with this pandemic like to repeat that claim over and over again but I've yet to see evidence of such a claim. 

Actually, outpatient growth is increasing significantly over the years. Since people don't have as much money to pay their hospital bills, hospitals end up cuttings costs/resources which mean they can't keep up with the in demand of patients with limited resource. You also have to remember most hospitals are non profit so they don't have a lot of money to back themselves up in this crisis.

Lastly, people are more inclined to not go to a hospital when they need to which in return might kill them or make the situation way worse and end up costing the hospital more money and more time.

Also, the death rate increase in homicide too during great recession.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/a-recession-is-coming-what-it-could-mean-for-healthcare.html

"Violent crime rates may have risen at first during the Depression (in 1933, nationwide homicide mortality rate hit a high for the century until that point, at 9.7 per 100,000 people) but the trend did not continue throughout the decade. As the economy showed signs of recovery in 1934-37, the homicide rate went down by 20 percent."

Last edited by Snoopy - on 25 May 2020

Snoopy said:
jason1637 said:

Dudes these people arent just percentages. Close too 100,000 people dead. Think about that number dude. Imagine how many families and friends are grieving right now. Now without lockdowns it could be in the millions which would be even more heartbreaking. 

Also driving a car and walking were not illegal. You can still do these things with lockdowns. 

Dude imagine the hundreds of millions of people losing everything and possibly going homeless. Not to mention the suicides, anxiety, heart attacks from financial stress, and death from the increase in criminal activities, ect. Whether you like it or not, the economy has a bigger impact on people lives than the coronavirus.

I love this argument. Arguing that stress from not being able to work will kill so many people from suicides and an increase in stress related conditions, but completely ignoring the stress from continuing to work in the middle of a pandemic. Ask any essential worker just how relaxed they've been over the last couple months, and I promise you that this has not been a walk in the park for us. It would be much worse were the government to openly support using us as cannon fodder, killing hundreds of thousands more.

Then you go on to say that the economy has a bigger impact on people's lives than the coronavirus, which too looks at the negative economic impact of a lockdown in which 100,000 people still die, while ignoring the negative economic impact of avoiding a lockdown causing a significant amount of increased deaths. Unless you are literally forcing people to work, I would wager you would have a lot of businesses shutting down, failing and workers refusing to show over a much greater period of time. Without the expanded safety nets which have been put into place, this would have been much more difficult to move forward from.

Your sociopathic writhing is not only murderous and vile, but it is unlikely to have a positive effect on the economy. The best course of action for the economy would have been leaning much harder into the lockdown and doing it sooner, so we could have cut this off at its roots before it became a nationwide disaster, and opened up more quickly.



coolbeans said:
vivster said:

It actually has not much to do with color. What Biden means is perfectly encapsulated in this subreddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/

tldr; it's not a good idea to vote for a politician who wants only the worst for you.

Okay.  I'll give credit that you're not taking the more pernicious line of thinking there.  

The problem being: this is where boldly attesting this behavior runs into huge speed bumps when actually looking at raw data before this pandemic.  For someone who seems intent on wanting the worst against blacks, you're totally blundering your intent when historically low black unemployment happens during your "reign."  Not to mention in relation to the most productive of any racial category, taking a more adversarial stance on regulations gets you to net talking points like black/Hispanic entrepreneurship.  You've gotta be a huge fuck-up to have such egregious intent and fumble this hard on something that's been historically so easy to do in the US. 

Ironically, a detached outsider of partisan politics would seem anxious to share records of prominent US cities that've been historically Dem. safe havens in that reddit thread.  But, of course, all kinds of defensive maneuvers are drawn up when those observations are made.

It was my mistake to insinuate that Donald Trump has any intent whatsoever. I would never claim that. Of course Donald Trump has no ill intent for black people, he doesn't have any intent at all, except for satisfying whatever narcissistic urges happen to be in his sorry excuse for a brain at the moment.

Donald Trump with his actions and the Republican party as a whole are generally bad news for anyone earning less than a million in a year. I'd say that encompasses about 99% of black people in the US. So yeah, Donald Trump is bad news for the vast majority of black people. Just like he's bad news for the vast majority of people, including the majority of people who voted for him.

It's typical reality detached thinking of Republican fans that having a job means doing well. I'm sure those newly employed black people are having a blast with their low wage jobs, no health insurance and all that cool systemic racism.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Snoopy said:
Torillian said:

https://www.pnas.org/content/106/41/17290

And here's an article about how the great depression didn't affect mortality other than suicides increasing, but overall deaths were actually down and population health was up. 

It makes intuitive sense to say that economic turmoil could cause more deaths than Covid, and that's why leaders who don't want to deal with this pandemic like to repeat that claim over and over again but I've yet to see evidence of such a claim. 

Actually, outpatient growth is increasing significantly over the years. Since people don't have as much money to pay their hospital bills, hospitals end up cuttings costs/resources which mean they can't keep up with the in demand of patients with limited resource. You also have to remember most hospitals are non profit so they don't have a lot of money to back themselves up in this crisis.

Lastly, people are more inclined to not go to a hospital when they need to which in return might kill them or make the situation way worse and end up costing the hospital more money and more time.

Also, the death rate increase in homicide too during great recession.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/a-recession-is-coming-what-it-could-mean-for-healthcare.html

"Violent crime rates may have risen at first during the Depression (in 1933, nationwide homicide mortality rate hit a high for the century until that point, at 9.7 per 100,000 people) but the trend did not continue throughout the decade. As the economy showed signs of recovery in 1934-37, the homicide rate went down by 20 percent."

Those violent crime rates are mainly because alcohol prohibition from 1920-1933 which led to numerous gang wars.  Sure the depression might of had something to do with it but to ignore the main contributing factor is just flat misleading.  Notice how prohibition ended in 1933.

The US economy was still sputturing till about 1939 around the start of WW2.