Wouldn't it have been easier...

[MadChemist]

I just read a thread where that was suggested.

It was immediately pilloried by the left.

Seems like a reasonable approach to me.

Here we have yet another madman who doesn't think on his own, but is confident to render judgment on "reasonable".

Explain to us, then, reasonable one, how you would "isolate" the 60 million elderly and the roughly 60 million non-elderly at-risk persons. Also, bear in mind what "isolate" means, if you will, and the nine figures that make up 120.000.000.

That would still mean, 200 million contracting the extremely contagious virus in a short time span, many of them falling mildly to severely ill. Explain that how the medical system is supposed to cope with that wave.

Further, with the collapse of the medical system because of overload, explain how those now in that very system for a variety of diseases are to be both isolated AND treated.

Explain further, how so many falling ill for months is better for the economy than a few weeks of shut-down to curtail the spread.

And don't come back before you have put in the first thought to underpin your ... "judgment".

I supposed that reasonable might mean...it's a good conversation to have.

Ple

I just read a thread where that was suggested.

It was immediately pilloried by the left.

Seems like a reasonable approach to me.

Here we have yet another madman who doesn't think on his own, but is confident to render judgment on "reasonable".

Explain to us, then, reasonable one, how you would "isolate" the 60 million elderly and the roughly 60 million non-elderly at-risk persons. Also, bear in mind what "isolate" means, if you will, and the nine figures that make up 120.000.000.

That would still mean, 200 million contracting the extremely contagious virus in a short time span, many of them falling mildly to severely ill. Explain that how the medical system is supposed to cope with that wave.

Further, with the collapse of the medical system because of overload, explain how those now in that very system for a variety of diseases are to be both isolated AND treated.

Explain further, how so many falling ill for months is better for the economy than a few weeks of shut-down to curtail the spread.

And don't come back before you have put in the first thought to underpin your ... "judgment".

When you can tell me:

1. Why I would explain postulates you have made.....based on ?

2. Why I would explain something that hasn't happened in the U.S. and you are only speculating about.

3. Where I made any statement about the economy.

4. How you think you have any say in when I come back with or what I have to do prior.

I might think about reading any of your future posts.

 

[Care4all]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country.

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Interesting thought, and the data on the age bands was there pretty early.

On the other hand, we love to lose our shit, panic, politicize everything and point the finger, and we wouldn't have been able to do that.

Priorities. Priorities.
.

The evidence is growing that even though the virus doesn’t kill younger people, it is leaving them with reduced cardio/pulmonary function. Whether this is permanent or temporary it’s too soon to tell.

AND you still would have to do these shut downs because you don’t have enough hospital beds or ventilators to handle more than 1.5 million cases nationwide. CDC officials estimate that up to half the American people will get the virus. That’s 150 million people. 20% of those people will needs to be hospitalized. That’s 30 million people. How do you fit 30 million people into 1 million hospital beds. You make sure they don’t all get sick at the same time.

I had heard those getting sicker that were between the ages of 20 to 55 were those in the high risk category, those with asthma, fighting cancer, smokers with lung conditions etc and those kind of things..... which in my first thoughts on it, would be isolated in their homes because they would be considered in the high risk, so they could be protected along with the elderly shuttered at home, etc.

I did not know the normally healthy were also getting really sick as you and old Europe have been trying to explain, so that is a negative dash on my suggestion of who to isolate.

Also, the probability for the virus to mutate and turn itself in to a version of where their antigens built up from the first version may not protect them from getting it on the second version... So that could not be as beneficial for society as the Epidemiologist had said it would be if the healthy caught it and hardly knew it, the following virus season?

And another negative to my plan that would have to be worked out that I just thought of, is what about the elderly that have regular doctor's appts or hospital visits... if everyone healthy is running around with the virus, building up antigens.... then how could those at risk go to the hospital and doctor's offices safely, when they need to?

And who will shop for them, who will get prescriptions, that is not infected kind of thing would need to be worked out....

Those negatives are adding up.....

 

[MadChemist]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country.

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Interesting thought, and the data on the age bands was there pretty early.

On the other hand, we love to lose our shit, panic, politicize everything and point the finger, and we wouldn't have been able to do that.

Priorities. Priorities.
.

The evidence is growing that even though the virus doesn’t kill younger people, it is leaving them with reduced cardio/pulmonary function. Whether this is permanent or temporary it’s too soon to tell.

AND you still would have to do these shut downs because you don’t have enough hospital beds or ventilators to handle more than 1.5 million cases nationwide. CDC officials estimate that up to half the American people will get the virus. That’s 150 million people. 20% of those people will needs to be hospitalized. That’s 30 million people. How do you fit 30 million people into 1 million hospital beds. You make sure they don’t all get sick at the same time.

I had heard those getting sicker that were between the ages of 20 to 55 were those in the high risk category, those with asthma, fighting cancer, smokers with lung conditions etc and those kind of things..... which in my first thoughts on it, would be isolated in their homes because they would be considered in the high risk, so they could be protected along with the elderly shuttered at home, etc.

I did not know the normally healthy were also getting really sick as you and old Europe have been trying to explain, so that is a negative dash on my suggestion of who to isolate.

Also, the probability for the virus to mutate and turn itself in to a version of where their antigens built up from the first version may not protect them from getting it on the second version... So that could not be as beneficial for society as the Epidemiologist had said it would be if the healthy caught it and hardly knew it, the following virus season?

And another negative to my plan that would have to be worked out that I just thought of, is what about the elderly that have regular doctor's appts or hospital visits... if everyone healthy is running around with the virus, building up antigens.... then how could those at risk go to the hospital and doctor's offices safely, when they need to?

And who will shop for them, who will get prescriptions, that is not infected kind of thing would need to be worked out....

Those negatives are adding up.....

But it is worth examining and I am sure there are those doing that.

You can't keep people apart forever. As they do start to ebb out and the virus spreads (as it will), you want to be in a position to manage it. What does that mean ? I don't have specfics, but I would think protocols could be put in place.

As an example...if you have an elderly person living with you, should you be tested as a priority (along with them).

 

[Care4all]

maybe when God said the end of the world would be signaled by trumpets, he meant "Trump/Pence"?

Where did God say that?

Specifics please.

The last plagues in the book of revelation, all signalled by trumpets being sounded... is what he could mean?

 

[Nostra]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Pogo no link in the OP.

Your outrage over this seems to be very selective.

 

[Care4all]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Pogo no link in the OP.

Your outrage over this seems to be very selective.

Heh!!! My op was truly my op, With no suggestion of such in the news!!! It came to me in a dream, I woke up, thought about it, and asked the question... there is no link.

 

[j-mac]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

 

[Norman]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Because then media would have complained that Trump is not doing anything and Biden would have won the election since fake news would have been all over about how many Trump let die.

Now Trump did everything so the media can't do anything else than to shut up.

Plus, we don't want to become Italy, there is always that, too.

 

[Missourian]

That's the dumbest thing I have read from you in all this time. Surprising, frankly.

Folks are dying throughout the age cohorts, even the young. These are the first you sacrifice on the altar of the economy.

Worse than that, even while not dying, folks fall seriously ill, also throughout the age cohorts, and in numbers sure to overwhelm every healthcare system on earth. Even if you can successfully isolate the elderly, that's ten percent of the population in hospitals in an extremely fast-spreading epidemic. An overwhelmed healthcare system results in many more deaths, to start with, not least deaths and sick among the clinic personnel. How do you treat all the Covid-19 patients then, not to mention all the other sick that still need treatment and care?

Also, those who fall even mildly ill - also throughout all age cohorts - live, probably for the rest of their life, with a 20 to 30% reduced lung function. Yet another sacrifice you make on the altar of the economy.

Yes, building up antigens is important. You know, that's what a vaccine is for, and without the death toll or other consequences of falling ill, don't you?

All in all, you clearly haven't thought this through, and seem to have replaced your care for all with dollar signs.

This ^^^^

 

[Erinwltr]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

 

[j-mac]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

Yeah, just look at it....Being controlled pretty damned well if you ask me....Tell me do you freak out over the flu too?

 

[Erinwltr]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

Yeah, just look at it....Being controlled pretty damned well if you ask me....Tell me do you freak out over the flu too?

Nobody asked you your opinion about control, and Covid-19 is not the flu.
HRC lost and you don't have a Bogeyman to blame for the colossal failure that DJT is and the bedlam that his economic policies have created.

 

[bluzman61]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

That WOULD'VE been more prudent and effective. Nice post, thanks.

 

[The Original Tree]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Would have been easier to just pass the original bill without Schummer and Pelosi trying to hold America Hostage with their Nazi Globalist Agenda.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Funny how your friends on the left went full baboon on this idea.

Just check out the corresponding threads.

The answer is it would have been lot better and lot more meaningful.

 

[Shawnee_b]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

Probably. Yet the whole country is not shuttered, and it's up to governors in each state. They do that, not "orange man bad guy"

 

[Carl in Michigan]

And more prudent and effective if we had taken the steps to isolate all those that are at high risk of dying from the corona virus 19, than to shut the whole country down or to shutter the whole country?

Also, I understand that it is important that As many healthy people that could get it, get it....the better.... because they build up antigens...much like a vaccination, that helps prevent them from getting it again in the fall.... it's part of the reason we've been able to subdue other deadly viruses.

Plus, most of the at risk, are older and not working...

The economy would have gone on as usual, no shut downs, no market crashes....

Why didn't we take that approach?

WINNER! This is exactly what I, and many orhan we rs, have been saying!

 

[eagle1462010]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

Yeah, just look at it....Being controlled pretty damned well if you ask me....Tell me do you freak out over the flu too?

Nobody asked you your opinion about control, and Covid-19 is not the flu.
HRC lost and you don't have a Bogeyman to blame for the colossal failure that DJT is and the bedlam that his economic policies have created.

Trump must be a God then.......because the whole world is in a world of shit right now because of this virus...........except most of the World is dealing with TDS on top of this virus......

His economic policies have created.........LOL........we were doing pretty decent until this bug showed up.........so was the rest of the world.

The biggest problem in the United States is NEW YORK and New Jersey.......they are Blue States ......heavily dense populated areas.....and they have over HALF of all cases here...........DID TRUMP CAUSE THAT TOO..........hmmm.......What about their BS of having large gatherings in February saying they weren't racist or Xenophobic...........was that really smart and why aren't you bitching about that.

We have heard TDS for a long time now......years........we are tired of it.........If you get your head out of your ass long enough to discuss REALITY...........then maybe we can end this BS.

I don't think you can do it........TDS rules and you WILL GET RETURN FIRE........this isn't the time for it.

 

[j-mac]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

Yeah, just look at it....Being controlled pretty damned well if you ask me....Tell me do you freak out over the flu too?

Nobody asked you your opinion about control, and Covid-19 is not the flu.
HRC lost and you don't have a Bogeyman to blame for the colossal failure that DJT is and the bedlam that his economic policies have created.

No one may have asked but I told you anyway...This is a message board you know, so I don't need your permission to post...As for your thoughts that Trump is failing in your eyes, I suspect comes from the school of you wanting some kind of AOC, liberal wish list of freedom killing changes to this country. So, If you are upset that you aren't getting them, then that makes Trump a huge success in my eyes...

 

[Erinwltr]

Unfortunately prudence is not a page in DJT's administration repertoire.

Oh shut up, Jesus! As much as I thought Obama was just horrible as a President, I never thought for a moment that he didn't want to do the best he could for the country, just what HE thought was the best approach..You people and your pathetic hatred over losing an election is just plain stupid now....

Oh Baby Jebuz, I will not shut up. Folks have moved on since 2016. Nobody is mad about HRC losing. You are being plain stupid in your analysis of what drives folks to critique DJT and his presidency. He is in all our faces, every day screwing up everything he touches. Just look at the Covid-19 response.

Yeah, just look at it....Being controlled pretty damned well if you ask me....Tell me do you freak out over the flu too?

Nobody asked you your opinion about control, and Covid-19 is not the flu.
HRC lost and you don't have a Bogeyman to blame for the colossal failure that DJT is and the bedlam that his economic policies have created.

No one may have asked but I told you anyway...This is a message board you know, so I don't need your permission to post...As for your thoughts that Trump is failing in your eyes, I suspect comes from the school of you wanting some kind of AOC, liberal wish list of freedom killing changes to this country. So, If you are upset that you aren't getting them, then that makes Trump a huge success in my eyes...

Again. I don't need to be told anything from you. You apparently missed that point. I'm not upset. And DJT is a failure.