.02% chance of death.... thats what we are destroying our nation over

[bripat9643]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

I'm not interested in sacrificing everything I have ever earned for the sake of some 80 year old person I don't even know.

Mighty white of you...not.

That's just honesty. 2 million people die every year in this country. We should we destroy the entire country because that number is 5% larger one year?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I can explain it to you trump morons but I can't help you understand it

Correction. I can lie to you but I can't make you believe it.

 

[eddiew]

Here Bri and friends Get educated

Timeline: What Trump Has Said And Done About The ... - NPR
www.npr.org › 2020/04/21 › timeline-what-trump-has-sai...


Apr 21, 2020 - President Trump has delivered an ever-evolving message to the American public about the coronavirus pandemic. We compare Trump's ...

Timeline: Trump's slow coronavirus response vs. the warning ...
www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2020/04/07 › timeli...


Apr 7, 2020 - And as it has spread, we keep learning about new warning signs that apparently weren't heeded. It wouldn't be until mid-March that Trump would ...

Top st

 

[EvilCat Breath]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

There never was a curve to flatten. Even in the hardest hit New York where the deaths were deliberate the hospitals were never really overwhelmed.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Here Bri and friends Get educated
Timeline: What Trump Has Said And Done About The ... - NPR
www.npr.org › 2020/04/21 › timeline-what-trump-has-sai...


Apr 21, 2020 - President Trump has delivered an ever-evolving message to the American public about the coronavirus pandemic. We compare Trump's ...
Timeline: Trump's slow coronavirus response vs. the warning ...
www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2020/04/07 › timeli...


Apr 7, 2020 - And as it has spread, we keep learning about new warning signs that apparently weren't heeded. It wouldn't be until mid-March that Trump would ...

Top st

npr never educates. It propagandizes.

Educates means tell the public that democrat states have released thousands of criminals to prey upon the innocent while ordering the police to raid churches.

 

[colfax_m]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

There never was a curve to flatten. Even in the hardest hit New York where the deaths were deliberate the hospitals were never really overwhelmed.

Never overwhelmed? That's nonsense. They were totally overwhelmed. They were flying in doctors/nurses from all over the country. They had built hundreds of ICU beds into makeshift units in OR suites. It was nuts.

 

[colfax_m]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

 

[progressive hunter]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

There never was a curve to flatten. Even in the hardest hit New York where the deaths were deliberate the hospitals were never really overwhelmed.

Never overwhelmed? That's nonsense. They were totally overwhelmed. They were flying in doctors/nurses from all over the country. They had built hundreds of ICU beds into makeshift units in OR suites. It was nuts.

just because they brought in extra resources doesnt mean they were overwhelmed,,,only a few of the hospitals were overwhelmed while others barely saw an increase
if you look into it you will find that most of those resources werent used and later dismantled and went back from where they came,,,

 

[eddiew]

Here Bri and friends Get educated
Timeline: What Trump Has Said And Done About The ... - NPR
www.npr.org › 2020/04/21 › timeline-what-trump-has-sai...


Apr 21, 2020 - President Trump has delivered an ever-evolving message to the American public about the coronavirus pandemic. We compare Trump's ...
Timeline: Trump's slow coronavirus response vs. the warning ...
www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2020/04/07 › timeli...


Apr 7, 2020 - And as it has spread, we keep learning about new warning signs that apparently weren't heeded. It wouldn't be until mid-March that Trump would ...

Top st

npr never educates. It propagandizes.

Educates means tell the public that democrat states have released thousands of criminals to prey upon the innocent while ordering the police to raid churches.

Can lead you to the water but if your rock hard republican head refuses to drink I can't make you You live a life of pipe dreams and believing BS No sweat off my back

 

[bripat9643]

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

ROFL! You blithely write off hundreds of thousands of businesses closing or going bankrupt and millions of people going broke and living on the street. No sane person can take insane morons like you seriously

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

But they remain isolated? Many businesses already closed permanently. Suicide rates and drug overdose Rates are up too. It’s lives vs lives.

 

[bripat9643]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

Your theory that we can prevent everyone from dying is pure idiocy. 60,000 people die from the flu every year. We are we only now insisting that these deaths are preventable?

 

[bripat9643]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

But they remain isolated? Many businesses already closed permanently. Suicide rates and drug overdose Rates are up too. It’s lives vs lives.

I have some friends who had to close their restaurant. Now we pay them to mow our lawn. Idiots like Colfax doesn't have a problem with that happening to the entire country.

 

[eddiew]

MANY deaths WERE preventable if only the unqualified moron in the WH moved faster than a post turtle

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

But they remain isolated? Many businesses already closed permanently. Suicide rates and drug overdose Rates are up too. It’s lives vs lives.

I have some friends who had to close their restaurant. Now we pay them to mow our lawn. Idiots like Colfax doesn't have a problem with that happening to the entire country.

I work in management consulting and I banking. I have seen generational businesses close and hundreds unemployed. Had a CEO/Founder of a company call me and tell me he didn’t want to live as he laid off 180 people. People who aren’t in the economy don’t see the devastation of these lockdowns. They think it’s money over lives but it is lives vs lives. My brother in law took a 30% pay cut. Has two kids in college. My sister in law lost her job completely. The devastation is far reaching and impacts everyone. We are punishing 95% to protect less than 1%. And we aren’t even protecting them. Idiotic.

 

[bripat9643]

MANY deaths WERE preventable if only the unqualified moron in the WH moved faster than a post turtle

That's pure speculation. It's also water under the bridge. The question is what to do now. Your theory that every death is preventable is pure insanity.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

MANY deaths WERE preventable if only the unqualified moron in the WH moved faster than a post turtle

None were. We should have never locked down that you can call him a moron for. Should have been like Sweden.

 

[colfax_m]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

But they remain isolated? Many businesses already closed permanently. Suicide rates and drug overdose Rates are up too. It’s lives vs lives.

Because they can't stay isolated. This is the third time I've said it. The older, infirm, elderly, institutionalized, they cannot stay isolated because their functional capacity is not very good.

Show me the data on suicide rates and drug overdoses. Thanks.

 

[colfax_m]

MANY deaths WERE preventable if only the unqualified moron in the WH moved faster than a post turtle

None were. We should have never locked down that you can call him a moron for. Should have been like Sweden.

That's very unlikely true. Earlier intervention would have prevented much of this disaster. We were far too slow to respond and when this is all over, we need to understand why so it won't happen again.

 

[bripat9643]

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

Congrats, you have passed 4th grade math!

The point is, that this isn’t over. It’s actually a long way from being over. We aren’t shutting down the country because of the people that HAVE died. We are doing it to protect the people that WILL die. We are fighting to prevent 0.02% from becoming 0.1% or 1%.

No, we are not. The policy is wrong and will cost more lives than if no policy had been put in place.

That doesn’t seem likely. Did you see what happened in New York? Do you want that everywhere?

NY was an anomaly. Again odds of you dying if you’re under 59 are very slim.

NY was what happens when the virus takes hold before mitigation.

No. NYC happens when you infect nursing homes at a rapid rate. They are an outlier. Didn’t happen anywhere else in the country. And still 98% of those who died are those who either old and or very unhealthy. We can protect them and open the country. They were wrong in terms of how many hospital beds and ventilators they would need. Need to follow Sweden’s model.

Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

Herd immunity is the only realistic option—the question is how to get there safely.

www.foreignaffairs.com

Nursing homes are everywhere dude. Unhealthy people are everywhere. Old people are everywhere.

The more you open up the country, the harder it is to protect them. Old, unhealthy, nursing home patients cannot exist in isolation. They are almost by definition reliant on others for activities of daily life.

And they can remain on lockdown. The rest of us should be able to go out and give the economy a boost. Set up testing at nursing homes to test those going in (workers). Vaccines are not 100% effective. When would you reopen?

Id reopen when we can identify, trace and isolate cases, like you do with any outbreak.

It’ll happen. It won’t be that long.

How long. Guesstimate.

Different place to place. Depends on how competent your state is.

I’m not a big fan of the “Jesus take the wheel” approach.

0.02% of the entire country today has died as a result of COVID. That’s out of everyone, not just the infected.

We are all going to get infected sooner or later

and those with underlying medical conditions will die from it

but everyone else will survive just as humans always have

I don't believe that's true. Not everyone gets the flu every year.

True

some of us may postpone the inevitable for two years

But sooner or later...

There's nothing inevitable about it.

I suppose total isolation in space might keep the chinese disease at bay

but here on earth only one person out of a million can live in total isolation

It doesn't require total isolation. It requires contact tracing and testing. Find out who has it, isolate them, find out who they possibly gave it to, test them, isolate those that turn out to be infect, etc. etc. etc. Find the disease, track it, end it.

Or spread it and allow for herd immunity.

Lets say there are 100 of us and 25 are old or at risk. We protect the 25 but we 75 go out. We all get it and then the virus has nowhere to go and dies out and then we release the remaining 25.

The very fact that 75 out of 100 has it means the 25 aren’t protected.

That’s how it always works. Healthy protect the vulnerable.

Here that’s what I thought we were doing by social distancing. The healthy are sacrificing to protect the vulnerable. Yet, what I’m hearing is that the healthy should not be “punished” and shouldn’t have to protect the vulnerable, who are only a very small percentage.

we protect them better by garnering herd immunity. This was supposed to flatten the curve not lockdown til there is a cure. By garnering herd immunity we protect the vulnerable. By doing what we are doing now we prolong the pain for everyone. ECONOMIC Pain is real. It’s lives vs lives not $$$ vs lives

The problem is that the process of getting "herd immunity" puts them at severe risk. The vulnerable are dependent on us for lots of things. If the virus is running unhihibited through the general population, it's far more likely it reaches the vulnerable.

Economic pain is real, but recoverable.

But they remain isolated? Many businesses already closed permanently. Suicide rates and drug overdose Rates are up too. It’s lives vs lives.

I have some friends who had to close their restaurant. Now we pay them to mow our lawn. Idiots like Colfax doesn't have a problem with that happening to the entire country.

I work in management consulting and I banking. I have seen generational businesses close and hundreds unemployed. Had a CEO/Founder of a company call me and tell me he didn’t want to live as he laid off 180 people. People who aren’t in the economy don’t see the devastation of these lockdowns. They think it’s money over lives but it is lives vs lives. My brother in law took a 30% pay cut. Has two kids in college. My sister in law lost her job completely. The devastation is far reaching and impacts everyone. We are punishing 95% to protect less than 1%. And we aren’t even protecting them. Idiotic.

To protect less than 0.1%