Virus thread, the political one.

[Corso]

right? im glad im not the only one who sees/thinks this. have another point of view? share it... let the validity of the thought, idea or point do its own speaking. I find there are generally reasons ideas get attacked, while the good ones tend to hold up to scrutiny. bring your ideas, and be ready to defend them, not as gamesmanship, but because thats what people do with ideas.

times are interesting, please do share your ideas, all of them are welcome in these unprecedented times.

Matt makes a good point about being able to see other points of view. in some ways im lucky to have the income still, but the existential threat to society is what worries me. is it a luxury to not worry about myself, but about others? maybe, or maybe thats just always how i have been. ive never been much of a worry to myself, ive always worried more about others around me.

Im worried that people dont understand the implications of a system where less than 2 months of abnormal is almost enough to crash the entire thing. Really, its been less than 2 months, and folks cannot handle 2 months of foreign. this is a fragile system. Do people really want to go back to that? is there something desirable about a system that poor?

or do people want to design a new system that is more sustainable going forward? what might that look like? will it be so service oriented? or will people begin to value durable goods again, and lessen overall consumption of nonessential crap? will folks take up crafting? i know im looking into blacksmithing going forward.

or do we go back to our potential slave wage no healthcare jobs and call ourselves lucky to be working?

interesting times indeed

Yeah, it's all about "me". Whenever anyone post here, it's sharing their opinion or position, so of course it's about "them"... So I'm not allowed "my" oppinion, but you are?

Sorry, couldn't let this one pass.

[guido]

Opinion | Covid-19 Reality Has a Liberal Bias - The New York Times

"On Tuesday, the U.S. government’s top experts warned that Covid-19 was by no means under control, and that premature easing of social distancing could have disastrous consequences. As far as I can tell, their view is shared by almost all epidemiologists.

But they were shouting into the wind. Clearly, the Trump administration and its allies have already decided that we’re going to reopen the economy, never mind what the experts say. And if the experts are right and this leads to a new surge in deaths, the response won’t be to reconsider the policy, it will be to deny the facts.

Indeed, virus trutherism — insisting that Covid-19 deaths are greatly exaggerated and may reflect a vast medical conspiracy — is already widespread on the right. We can expect to see much more of it in the months ahead.

At one level, this turn of events shouldn’t surprise us. The U.S. right long ago rejected evidence-based policy in favor of policy-based evidence — denying facts that might get in the way of a predetermined agenda. Fourteen years have passed since Stephen Colbert famously quipped that “reality has a well-known liberal bias.”"

[jimcav]

And for the record, I think that Trump has done a terrible job of handling this. But that's also been pretty much the case for all but a handful of nations. Unlike most of you, I don't have a belief that someone else in the White House would have handled things in a far superior way. I'm sure they would have done some things differently but I think overall we would be more or less in the same place simply because we as a nation were not adequately prepared for something of this magnitude. But that's only my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it....

I agree with the 1st part, but not the second. Having had to participate in/develop a response for the military installations where I was stationed when I was AD for both swine flu and Ebola, I am just dumbfounded by the inability of the most powerful nation on earth to inadequately RESPOND. Even setting the issue aside of not being prepared (and it is true that few nations were, and most of those were the nations most impacted by SARS/MERS), it is just ridiculous to not cogently, quickly, and continuously marshal the full force of American industry and volunteerism in a strategic, national way.

NYC got behind the curve so to speak, but through concerted, continuous effort, involving cooperation, citizen adherence, and typical American outpouring of support, they prevented overwhelming their system, and saved many lives. Much of the USA has similar issues: we didn't have the early strategy (to include resources and the will) to properly contain this pandemic initially with testing, contact tracing/isolation, so it is all catch up. However, if any nation can muster the will, production, and actions needed, it should be US(A). I keep hoping that such a strategy will emerge.

[BBB]

Considering the "other" is not just an individual awareness issue, but also part of the role of government when it deliberates on the appropriate response to a serious health issue like we are currently faced with.

Governments around the world are faced with a serious health issue on the one hand and economic collapse on the other. Not an easy thing to deal with.

My take on this is that governments should be focusing on the health issues first and then tailor the economic response. If, based on expert medical advice, the best way to prevent the spread of Covid-19 is to enforce restrictions on people (and in so doing knowing this will cause considerable economic pain) then this is the route to take. The economics of that decision then need to be dealt with (unemployment benefits, assistance to businesses, laws regulating the relationship between landlords and tenants in circumstances where tenants may be struggling to pay rent and so on). It doesn't seem there is much argument that imposing restrictions on people is the best way to prevent the spread of Covid-19.

I get that it would be extremely hard if you have lost your job as a result of government enforced restrictions. Hopefully the people in government making those decisions have sufficient empathy to tailor the economic response accordingly. If you can't afford to pay your mortgage, then the government should be tailoring policies to regulate banks and their customers in these unusual times for example.

This is obviously the ideal scenario.

I think we in Australia have done okay. It is not perfect, but certainly way better than the current government's track record would suggest.

In the US, unfortunately, this pandemic has hit in an election year and undermined (completely) Trump's one key argument, namely that the economy was humming along nicely under his stewardship. Maybe his desire to get things up and running again can only be seen through this key electoral argument. In this way it is not so much thinking about the other, but thinking about himself.

Which does lead to an interesting issue: would you rather be a leader that responded appropriately and lost the subsequent election or responded inappropriately with either result? I'm sure Churchill was annoyed when he lost the election in 1945, but history will forever remember his efforts during the war. History won't be so kind to Trump win, lose or draw.

My fear in the opening up the economy debate (which is going on everywhere) is what if we get it wrong? A spike in cases will see more death and illness, people back behind close doors and more pressure on government coffers. Sure it would be great to go camping, fly overseas for a holiday or have all those great bikes races run, but the cost of enjoying those things may be greater in the long run. Normality is going to take some time to achieve and we all need some patience and support to get there. Blokes running around with assault rifles having an extended whinge is not going to help.

My other fear is that this is (insert inverted commas) only Covid-19. What happens if next time it is something much worse?

[Colinmclelland]

to what @choke said...I do think about that point of view. But I think the more important thing, which he alluded to, is WHERE that point of view is coming from which many here have recognized is the economic issue especially to them personally in the very powerful “how the eff am I going to eat and feed my family”?

But when I think of the point of view, knowing where those that hold it are coming from, what I do NOT understand is their argument and anger about “opening up”.

Quite simply, I think they are getting angry and attacking the wrong thing...they are not attacking with their thinking and their emotions and beliefs what the real problem is.

The problem is NOT the so called lockdowns.

The problem is that, in the USA, there is one political way of thinking which makes it so that the USA is the only country of the big wealthy countries that has not figured out how to support these people until things get back to a new normal.

There is such a political aversion to “unemployment benefits” “socialism” etc that the society which is what we are in and what a government is, is prevented from helping that society to survive.

It isn’t about a lockdown and choosing feed my family/ risk my life vs. go hungry and lose the house.

It is about society as a community doing what is right to help all members out and make sure that we all get through this together.

Simply, the ending the lockdown is not the solution as it will cause more death...the solution is ending the refusal of certain politicians to help all members of society in a meaningful way without getting their panties in a bunch about some absurd political words about capitalism or socialism or voting by mail is fraud or welfare moms or any of those other political bull crap that is only meant to keep people down. You can build roads, in a way those are socialist and you can do payments more than “6 months and too bad on health insurance” and still be an American, still be a capitalist.

Bizarrely, to a large degree, those who are fighting the lockdown for understandable reasons but they are fighting the false cause of those reasons would self-identify with the very political thinking that is causing them to suffer justifiable fear of hunger and homelessness.

That's my simplistic view from over here. What's the point of being the "richest nation on earth" if you won't use that wealth to help your citizens? Australia is an also ran in national wealth, but I'd much rather be here than there. Teeth aside, I have no issues around healthcare. If I need hospital treatment, I'll get hospital treatment. I'm pretty convinced this is helping de-rail fiat currencies, but all the same - you can print money, you should print money and help your citizens

[Mabouya]

That's my simplistic view from over here. What's the point of being the "richest nation on earth" if you won't use that wealth to help your citizens?

I suppose it's because it allows some small percentage of the population to do this:

[Matthew Strongin]

My fear in the opening up the economy debate (which is going on everywhere) is what if we get it wrong? A spike in cases will see more death and illness, people back behind close doors and more pressure on government coffers. Sure it would be great to go camping, fly overseas for a holiday or have all those great bikes races run, but the cost of enjoying those things may be greater in the long run. Normality is going to take some time to achieve and we all need some patience and support to get there. Blokes running around with assault rifles having an extended whinge is not going to help.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's an if but a when we get it wrong. I've been pouring over the county requirements for reopening to help my wife think through how to prepare her business for reopening and I doubt most businesses will actually be able to abide. At the same time, they too strict to be implemented effectively and too lenient to adequately protect employes and customers. That tells me it's premature to open. The county guidelines also state that if cases increase (which they will), they'll return to a heightened level of restrictions and businesses will be closed again. When you consider the costs associated with "restarting" a business, it's hard to get motivated about opening when there's a good chance you'll need to close again a few weeks later when the inevitable happens.

[djg714]

Yeah, it's all about "me". Whenever anyone post here, it's sharing their opinion or position, so of course it's about "them"... So I'm not allowed "my" oppinion, but you are?

Sorry, couldn't let this one pass.

So at 85k dead is when you decide is a good time to come out again and support your guy.
Again quoting you "couldn't let this one pass"
Expected reaction, never let one pass, just like,,we know who.

[guido]

“Obamagate” Is Niche Programming for Trump Superfans | The New Yorker

"Donald Trump will not shut up about Barack Obama—not now, not ever. On Thursday morning, amid the gravest economic crisis in a century and a deadly pandemic that will have killed more than a hundred thousand Americans by the end of this month, Trump yet again accused his predecessor of culpability in “the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA.” Obama, he said, should be hauled before the Senate to testify. “He knew EVERYTHING,” Trump added in his tweet, one of dozens of attacks in the past few days in which he has targeted “Obamagate.” What crime, exactly, was Trump accusing Obama of? What should he testify about? Trump never said, and it’s a safe bet that he never will.

On Monday afternoon, at a press conference on the White House lawn, Trump made that clear, in a memorable exchange with Phil Rucker, of the Washington Post, that echoed the paranoid fulminations of Trump’s hero Joseph McCarthy at his worst. “What crime, exactly, are you accusing President Obama of committing?” Rucker asked. “Obamagate,” Trump replied. “It’s been going on for a long time,” he added, without offering specifics. “What is the crime, exactly, that you’re accusing him of?” Rucker asked again. “You know what the crime is,” Trump answered. “The crime is very obvious to everybody.” Days later, that is still where we are: Trump is accusing Obama of a grave crime but refusing even to say what Obama allegedly did, while repeating over and over that the former President is guilty of something, a technique of political agitprop that recalls not only McCarthy but every wannabe dictator for whom the rule of law has little or nothing to do with accusations of illegality.

Perhaps, to Trump and his defenders, “Obamagate” really is such a known commodity that defining it is superfluous, even if it is not at all obvious to those who don’t populate Trump’s alternate reality of conspiracy theories and outright lies, a world in which Obama figures as a regular and sinister presence. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that the gap between partisan truths in Washington is so wide it’s practically a vortex. In many ways, the “Obamagate” exchange on Monday reminded me of the first day of the public impeachment hearings last fall in the House Intelligence Committee, in which Democrats spent hours outlining what they knew of the Trump Ukraine-shakedown scheme that had triggered the impeachment proceedings, while Devin Nunes, the Republican ranking member, offered up an array of little-known intrigues that seemed entirely unrelated to the matter at hand, including an alleged plot to “obtain nude pictures of Trump,” which, he said, was part of a “three-year-long operation” by Democrats, “the corrupt media,” and “partisan bureaucrats to overturn the results of the 2016 election.” I remember thinking: Naked pictures? What was he even talking about? It appeared to have something to do with a 2017 phone call to Representative Adam Schiff from two Russian pranksters claiming to represent the Ukrainian government and offering nude pictures of Trump with a Russian celebrity. Or something. If you had been following along with Fox News and the darker corners of the right, you knew exactly what Nunes was talking about."

[thollandpe]

That is the problem, in some areas it's OK to loosen things and in others it's not. Government isn't good at letting some people do things while keeping others from doing the same thing....they want a 'one size fits all' solution. Not to mention that people don't like being told that they can't do what the people 3 counties away can do....

I think the government is pretty good at letting some people do certain things while keeping others from doing the same thing. It’s an essential function.

I can’t simply climb behind the wheel of an 18-wheeler and pull out onto a public road, just like that truck driver can’t design a fume hood or a steam boiler. We’re licensed to do those specific things, just like barbers, nurses, land surveyors, etc.

The White House even published guidelines (gating criteria) On what it should take to reopen. I know that few, if any, of the states that are reopening met those criteria. Does Montana? Montana is one of the few, very few, that at least has met the soft definition of “flattening the curve”. So many of these other states, not even close.

The mitigation strategy was put in place to flatten the curve and not overwhelm our medical facilities. That mitigation strategy should be relaxed when the objectives are met, not when it becomes too difficult or too frustrating.

[Tom]

On the 'Obamagate' business. These guys are good. It's called 'priming'. Because somebody heard it recently they're more likely to make an association if they see something else sort of related that actually has no connection. It's one's intuitive thinking being affected by recent experience - and one's rational thinking takes its cues from the intuitive thinking, takes more effort and only works as hard as it has to unless it is consciously made not to. It makes absolutely no difference if there is content. Just the mention is all that is needed. And this is no comment about one segment of the population or another. Everybody does this, its how we're put together. In the old days it worked extremely well. Don't spend time thinking what that twig snap was in the bushes, climb a tree now!

Keep repeating the phrase, eventually it will gain credibility just by being repeated. Nudge the needle a little bit with the folks who are able to be influenced. Marginal gains, baby, marginal gains.

[monadnocky]

On the 'Obamagate' business. These guys are good. It's called 'priming'. Because somebody heard it recently they're more likely to make an association if they see something else sort of related that actually has no connection. It's one's intuitive thinking being affected by recent experience - and one's rational thinking takes its cues from the intuitive thinking, takes more effort and only works as hard as it has to unless it is consciously made not to. It makes absolutely no difference if there is content. Just the mention is all that is needed. And this is no comment about one segment of the population or another. Everybody does this, its how we're put together. In the old days it worked extremely well. Don't spend time thinking what that twig snap was in the bushes, climb a tree now!

Keep repeating the phrase, eventually it will gain credibility just by being repeated. Nudge the needle a little bit with the folks who are able to be influenced. Marginal gains, baby, marginal gains.

you know what he did. I don't have to tell you.

[mzilliox]

He ran the country with very little dramatics? Got bad ratings on fox?

[Clean39T]

Apropos.

------

Masters of War, Bob Dylan.

[theflashunc]

He ran the country with very little dramatics? Got bad ratings on fox?

Tan suit. Fancy mustard on a burger.

[Corso]

So at 85k dead is when you decide is a good time to come out again and support your guy.
Again quoting you "couldn't let this one pass"
Expected reaction, never let one pass, just like,,we know who.

Try keeping up with reality. I supported another solonista on the subject of "one sided views preferred' here. That was all.

I then chose to defend myself under the "all about you" BS statement - by someone who then went on to talk about themself in the same posting.

If you're going to quote me, at least have the curtesy to NOT put words in my mouth or project what you want on me.

Your "So at 85k dead is when you decide is a good time to come out again and support your guy." statement is simply "Fake News".

[davids]

Apropos.

------

Masters of War, Bob Dylan.

Eh. I want to hear the version he performed at the Grammys!

[mzilliox]

Tan suit. Fancy mustard on a burger.

yeah, but Reagan wore tan suits and hes a republican sweetheart. as far as mustard goes, what kind of guy eats fancy mustard? with no sugar in it? and actual mustard? weirdo

[Cookietruck]

Your "So at 85k dead is when you decide is a good time to come out again and support your guy." statement is simply "Fake News".

yeah, it's actually 86,851 now.
ArcGIS Dashboards

get the facts right!!

[guido]

What ever happened to the "no real name in your sig, no play in the political threads" rule?