The New Plan To Stop Ebola

[cultsmasher]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

 

[Swagger]

Simple: prevent, with force if necessary, people travelling from infected parts of the world (chiefly, the west coast of Africa) to areas of the world where ebola isn't present. Seriously, put the area under quarantine, send in specialists with heavily armed escorts to assess the extent the virus has spread and use deadly measures to prevent ebola from arriving on uninfected shores.

 

[TheOldSchool]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

 

[emilynghiem]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

Dear cultsmasher: at least the govt is honest in their inability to manage health care
for everyone under their jurisdiction. Now we can point to this as proof why we
need localized self-reliance as much as possible, because the govt cannot intervene in everything. We need to handle to handle more problems directly and only leave
the core centralized parts to federal govt so this is minimal for faster effective response with less bureaucracy.

See this link calling for public involvement in creating solutions directly:
Fighting Ebola A Grand Challenge for Development

Perfect opportunity for people to prove once and for all that solutions come
from people first, then the govt follows from there.

if the govt solved this problem, that would keep pushing this agenda and idea to
'wait on govt' and 'depend on govt to lead'
instead of people running things and govt serving the people as the venue.

Doctors Without Borders was the main nonprofit group credited
with leading the health care efforts that stopped outbreaks before.

That is a nonprofit group run and funded voluntarily.
So what does that tell you?

That the people lead first, and the government is supposed to follow from there.
The better we the people organize resources and ideas into action, then we can reform our govt
based on the best ideas implemented as models for public policy.

 

[cultsmasher]

Simple: prevent, with force if necessary, people travelling from infected parts of the world (chiefly, the west coast of Africa) to areas of the world where ebola isn't present. Seriously, put the area under quarantine, send in specialists with heavily armed escorts to assess the extent the virus has spread and use deadly measures to prevent ebola from arriving on uninfected shores.

Swagger,
In my thread, "Ebola: Convenience vs Plague," I pointed out that matters didn't have to be quite so drastic. All that is needed is for people be required to take a ship back here instead of a plane. And the same thing would go for anybody taking planes from countries that accept flights from infected areas. After any possible incubation period had passed, they could disembark. Though there is an easier way to stop it. Drop hydrogen bombs on the areas where it exists.

 

[cultsmasher]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

Dear cultsmasher: at least the govt is honest in their inability to manage health care
for everyone under their jurisdiction. Now we can point to this as proof why we
need localized self-reliance as much as possible, because the govt cannot intervene in everything. We need to handle to handle more problems directly and only leave
the core centralized parts to federal govt so this is minimal for faster effective response with less bureaucracy.

See this link calling for public involvement in creating solutions directly:
Fighting Ebola A Grand Challenge for Development

Perfect opportunity for people to prove once and for all that solutions come
from people first, then the govt follows from there.

if the govt solved this problem, that would keep pushing this agenda and idea to
'wait on govt' and 'depend on govt to lead'
instead of people running things and govt serving the people as the venue.

Doctors Without Borders was the main nonprofit group credited
with leading the health care efforts that stopped outbreaks before.

That is a nonprofit group run and funded voluntarily.
So what does that tell you?

That the people lead first, and the government is supposed to follow from there.
The better we the people organize resources and ideas into action, then we can reform our govt
based on the best ideas implemented as models for public policy.

emilyngheim,
It's a funny thing about people. Most of them have lives to lead. The whole reason for government's existence is to take care of these problems. For the government's failings, I wish I could blame it. But the failings of government basically come down to people. You also talk of doctors without borders being a nonprofit organization. But doing the kind of work they do, they wouldn't get far being a for profit organization.

 

[emilynghiem]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

Dear cultsmasher: at least the govt is honest in their inability to manage health care
for everyone under their jurisdiction. Now we can point to this as proof why we
need localized self-reliance as much as possible, because the govt cannot intervene in everything. We need to handle to handle more problems directly and only leave
the core centralized parts to federal govt so this is minimal for faster effective response with less bureaucracy.

See this link calling for public involvement in creating solutions directly:
Fighting Ebola A Grand Challenge for Development

Perfect opportunity for people to prove once and for all that solutions come
from people first, then the govt follows from there.

if the govt solved this problem, that would keep pushing this agenda and idea to
'wait on govt' and 'depend on govt to lead'
instead of people running things and govt serving the people as the venue.

Doctors Without Borders was the main nonprofit group credited
with leading the health care efforts that stopped outbreaks before.

That is a nonprofit group run and funded voluntarily.
So what does that tell you?

That the people lead first, and the government is supposed to follow from there.
The better we the people organize resources and ideas into action, then we can reform our govt
based on the best ideas implemented as models for public policy.

emilyngheim,
It's a funny thing about people. Most of them have lives to lead. The whole reason for government's existence is to take care of these problems. For the government's failings, I wish I could blame it. But the failings of government basically come down to people. You also talk of doctors without borders being a nonprofit organization. But doing the kind of work they do, they wouldn't get far being a for profit organization.

I agree that the problems and solutions lie with the people, and then this gets projected onto govt.

So we can either form solutions and implement those as models for govt
or continue to fight and just have fights going on in Courts and Congress as we have now,
which reflect the inability of people to resolve conflicts
but instead address problems by force and bullying.

I don't mean to switch such organizations to "run" for profit,
but ANY organization has to run like a business in terms of
being so effective with resources, that minimal money is lost to mistakes or waste;
so more money comes in than is lost to problems, and more of that money goes into services
to BUILD and to ELIMINATE the problems COSTING more resources. So it has to be sustainable.
In that sense, even charity organizations have to operate efficiently as businesses do to cover their
costs, and not go under by having more problems "escalating" out of control.

What WOULD help charity organizations is to set up a Sustainable endowment
such as universities or larger foundations use to replenish the grants they give out.

If all organizations had members that owned property that produced a regular
return monthly and annually on either residential or business rentals, that is one way
to have sustainable income coming in without relying on handouts or donations that are one time and then get expended.

By investing in buying and owning property, this becomes a sustainable source of revenue.
So this is one trick that can be learned from business investors.
The difference is that instead of a private investor using that passive income for sustainable
wealth for retirement or personal expenditures, the person who uses it for nonprofit would
direct the income there. So all charities could become sustainable by having 1-5 people using
investment money to create an endowment.

Another way is to set up campus or school systems owned by the nonprofit.
So that the education and work-study programs also generate income while
providing sustainable education and services as part of the charity structure.

In practice, businesses get to deduct 100% of their expenses from taxes,
so ALL the money can go directly into expanding and developing their services;
while nonprofits are only partially tax deductible.

So I know people who run their charities as a DBA business
in order to deduct 100% and do all their outreach work under that structure.

It does not require the same staffing and hiring of professional accountants or lawyers
to incorporate and handle reports, if all the work is done by contracted consultants with no formal staff.
So this allows the focus to be on the services,
by setting it up as a business under a DBA and not wasting resources trying to file or keep track
of donations and taxes as a nonprofit.

People can pay for services knowing that it is just to cover costs
like a not for profit business, where the charity exists to serve, and is not about making money per se
but just using that structure to minimalize the paperwork, filing and other costs that would take away from the services.

 

[NLT]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

Fuel air explosive bomb would work wonders
Thermobaric weapon - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[g5000]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

Fuel air explosive bomb would work wonders
Thermobaric weapon - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That's the problem with tards today. They see a Hollywood movie called Outbreak, which opens with the use of a fuel-air bomb in Africa in an attempt to stop a disease, and that is the extent of their knowledge about, and recommended solutions for, a disease.

 

[cultsmasher]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

Dear cultsmasher: at least the govt is honest in their inability to manage health care
for everyone under their jurisdiction. Now we can point to this as proof why we
need localized self-reliance as much as possible, because the govt cannot intervene in everything. We need to handle to handle more problems directly and only leave
the core centralized parts to federal govt so this is minimal for faster effective response with less bureaucracy.

See this link calling for public involvement in creating solutions directly:
Fighting Ebola A Grand Challenge for Development

Perfect opportunity for people to prove once and for all that solutions come
from people first, then the govt follows from there.

if the govt solved this problem, that would keep pushing this agenda and idea to
'wait on govt' and 'depend on govt to lead'
instead of people running things and govt serving the people as the venue.

Doctors Without Borders was the main nonprofit group credited
with leading the health care efforts that stopped outbreaks before.

That is a nonprofit group run and funded voluntarily.
So what does that tell you?

That the people lead first, and the government is supposed to follow from there.
The better we the people organize resources and ideas into action, then we can reform our govt
based on the best ideas implemented as models for public policy.

emilyngheim,
It's a funny thing about people. Most of them have lives to lead. The whole reason for government's existence is to take care of these problems. For the government's failings, I wish I could blame it. But the failings of government basically come down to people. You also talk of doctors without borders being a nonprofit organization. But doing the kind of work they do, they wouldn't get far being a for profit organization.

I agree that the problems and solutions lie with the people, and then this gets projected onto govt.

So we can either form solutions and implement those as models for govt
or continue to fight and just have fights going on in Courts and Congress as we have now,
which reflect the inability of people to resolve conflicts
but instead address problems by force and bullying.

I don't mean to switch such organizations to "run" for profit,
but ANY organization has to run like a business in terms of
being so effective with resources, that minimal money is lost to mistakes or waste;
so more money comes in than is lost to problems, and more of that money goes into services
to BUILD and to ELIMINATE the problems COSTING more resources. So it has to be sustainable.
In that sense, even charity organizations have to operate efficiently as businesses do to cover their
costs, and not go under by having more problems "escalating" out of control.

What WOULD help charity organizations is to set up a Sustainable endowment
such as universities or larger foundations use to replenish the grants they give out.

If all organizations had members that owned property that produced a regular
return monthly and annually on either residential or business rentals, that is one way
to have sustainable income coming in without relying on handouts or donations that are one time and then get expended.

By investing in buying and owning property, this becomes a sustainable source of revenue.
So this is one trick that can be learned from business investors.
The difference is that instead of a private investor using that passive income for sustainable
wealth for retirement or personal expenditures, the person who uses it for nonprofit would
direct the income there. So all charities could become sustainable by having 1-5 people using
investment money to create an endowment.

Another way is to set up campus or school systems owned by the nonprofit.
So that the education and work-study programs also generate income while
providing sustainable education and services as part of the charity structure.

In practice, businesses get to deduct 100% of their expenses from taxes,
so ALL the money can go directly into expanding and developing their services;
while nonprofits are only partially tax deductible.

So I know people who run their charities as a DBA business
in order to deduct 100% and do all their outreach work under that structure.

It does not require the same staffing and hiring of professional accountants or lawyers
to incorporate and handle reports, if all the work is done by contracted consultants with no formal staff.
So this allows the focus to be on the services,
by setting it up as a business under a DBA and not wasting resources trying to file or keep track
of donations and taxes as a nonprofit.

People can pay for services knowing that it is just to cover costs
like a not for profit business, where the charity exists to serve, and is not about making money per se
but just using that structure to minimalize the paperwork, filing and other costs that would take away from the services.

emelungheim,
Your statements about how to run an organization like doctors without borders is interesting, but rather beside the point. Though I will say that I am basically a Nationalist Socalist. That is basically akin to being a commie. The way I would work things would be to start with a nationalized health care system like they have in most of the advanced countries. As for the the insurance companies that make money off the way things now work, as far as I'm concerned, all those motherfuckers need to be put up against a wall and shot!!!

 

[g5000]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

"I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms." But that sure didn't stop you from ranting from ignorance, did it.

A person is only contagious with Ebola when they have a fever. It is possible during a 20 hour trip from Africa to the US that a passenger can transition into that stage.

 

[cultsmasher]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

Fuel air explosive bomb would work wonders
Thermobaric weapon - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

NLT,
Neutron bombs would work even better.

 

[NLT]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

Fuel air explosive bomb would work wonders
Thermobaric weapon - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That's the problem with tards today. They see a Hollywood movie called Outbreak, which opens with the use of a fuel-air bomb in Africa in an attempt to stop a disease, and that is the extent of their knowledge about, and recommended solutions for, a disease.

Hey dumbass ever hear of sarcasam

 

[cultsmasher]

How about we napalm the infected area and salt the land so nothing can ever grow there again?

Fuel air explosive bomb would work wonders
Thermobaric weapon - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That's the problem with tards today. They see a Hollywood movie called Outbreak, which opens with the use of a fuel-air bomb in Africa in an attempt to stop a disease, and that is the extent of their knowledge about, and recommended solutions for, a disease.

g5000,
Anybody who has seen any of the documentaries about the plague, what they called the black death, already have a pretty good ideas about how to handle a plague. And the way the government is now going about it isn't the way to do it. At least with HIV, there was a way to keep from getting AIDS. But ebola is a whole different can of worms.

 

[cultsmasher]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

"I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms." But that sure didn't stop you from ranting from ignorance, did it.

A person is only contagious with Ebola when they have a fever. It is possible during a 20 hour trip from Africa to the US that a passenger can transition into that stage.

g5000,
How can you be so stupid. The incubation period for ebola can be up to 21 days. What if somebody was infected the day before they got on a flight. They could go anywhere in that time. Also, they say that somebody who is infected with ebola isn't infectious until they get sick. But would you want to be having any personal contact with an infected person before he got sick? Would you want to take a chance of a mosquito going from them to you? Or from them to a bat? The only way to stop ebola is to stop those who could have been infected until after the incubation period has passed. Not by falling back on your politically correct brainwashing.

 

[g5000]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

"I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms." But that sure didn't stop you from ranting from ignorance, did it.

A person is only contagious with Ebola when they have a fever. It is possible during a 20 hour trip from Africa to the US that a passenger can transition into that stage.

g5000,
How can you be so stupid. The incubation period for ebola can be up to 21 days. What if somebody was infected the day before they got on a flight. They could go anywhere in that time. Also, they say that somebody who is infected with ebola isn't infectious until they get sick. But would you want to be having any personal contact with an infected person before he got sick? Would you want to take a chance of a mosquito going from them to you? Or from them to a bat? The only way to stop ebola is to stop those who could have been infected until after the incubation period has passed. Not by falling back on your politically correct brainwashing.

A travel ban is impractical and unwarranted at this time.

Like many other misinformationists around here, you used the tactic of presenting only a single facet of the US government's efforts, as if that were the entirety of the plan. You are either incredibly ignorant, or you deliberately omitted the other policies it has put into effect. Neither option reflects well upon you.

Taking temperatures is not the only action being taken by the US government to fight Ebola.

 

[g5000]

The affected countries need more than medical supplies and doctors. All the medical supplies in the world will do no good so long as those nations lack the required logistical infrastructure to get the medicines and doctors into action.

If there is one thing at which the US military excels, it is logistics. This is why we are sending troops to those places. They will have the skills and ability to transport the materiel and secure the facilities to combat this outbreak.

This is but one more of many other angles of attack our government is taking. And just like Bush did with terrorism, we are taking the fight to the enemy.

 

[cultsmasher]

Apparently the new plan to stop ebola is to take people's temperature as they get off planes along with taking temperatures when they get on planes. I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms. But the plan the government has clearly isn't going to stop it. Why don't they just come out and say that they don't plan to stop it. The filthy scum!

"I don't know exactly how long it would take for an infected person to develope symptoms." But that sure didn't stop you from ranting from ignorance, did it.

A person is only contagious with Ebola when they have a fever. It is possible during a 20 hour trip from Africa to the US that a passenger can transition into that stage.

g5000,
How can you be so stupid. The incubation period for ebola can be up to 21 days. What if somebody was infected the day before they got on a flight. They could go anywhere in that time. Also, they say that somebody who is infected with ebola isn't infectious until they get sick. But would you want to be having any personal contact with an infected person before he got sick? Would you want to take a chance of a mosquito going from them to you? Or from them to a bat? The only way to stop ebola is to stop those who could have been infected until after the incubation period has passed. Not by falling back on your politically correct brainwashing.

A travel ban is impractical and unwarranted at this time.

Like many other misinformationists around here, you used the tactic of presenting only a single facet of the US government's efforts, as if that were the entirety of the plan. You are either incredibly ignorant, or you deliberately omitted the other policies it has put into effect. Neither option reflects well upon you.

Taking temperatures is not the only action being taken by the US government to fight Ebola.

g5000,
Talking to you on this topic is like talking to one of the denier morons who don't believe in human caused global warming. Taking temperatures is one of the ways the U.S. is trying to stop ebola. The other is a questionare. Which the guy who recently died from ebola in the U.S. lied on. So much for that idea. Neither would it help with somebody who could have been infected without them knowing it.

As to what you said, I never said anything about a travel ban. What are you trying to accomplish by trying to whip up hysteria? You aren't a member of that Japanese cult that wanted to destroy the world and released nerve gas into subways are you. Let people fly in if they want. They just can't fly out. Instead, they would have to take a boat and wait in port until 21 days had passed since their departure. You also say that taking action is unwarranted. When will it become warranted. When millions start dying here?

 

[g5000]

g5000,
Talking to you on this topic is like talking to one of the denier morons who don't believe in human caused global warming. Taking temperatures is one of the ways the U.S. is trying to stop ebola. The other is a questionare.

The other? Singular?

You see, this is exactly what I am talking about. Now you list only TWO things, as though that were the entirety of the plan the US government is putting into action.

And you call ME a denier? BWA-HA-HA-HA!

Idiot.

 

[cultsmasher]

The affected countries need more than medical supplies and doctors. All the medical supplies in the world will do no good so long as those nations lack the required logistical infrastructure to get the medicines and doctors into action.

If there is one thing at which the US military excels, it is logistics. This is why we are sending troops to those places. They will have the skills and ability to transport the materiel and secure the facilities to combat this outbreak.

This is but one more of many other angles of attack our government is taking. And just like Bush did with terrorism, we are taking the fight to the enemy.

g5000,
We send these people supplies. If they're to stupid to distribute and use them, I say fuck'em! It remindes me of the parents of the negro who died from ebola here. They're complaining that he didn't receive the best treatment. But after lying on the questionare he was given and bringing ebola here, they should have shoved him into a crematorium right off the bat. And the rest of his N..... family!