bluefrogguy

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, butlerbeatpitt15 said:

can someone get a hold of S Korea and tell them what they did right that we couldn't or can't do. Caues they are playing baseball without masks

U.S. needs to make temperature checks mandatory at all airports(internationally at least). When I was in Taiwan over ten years ago they had them and was dumbfounded as to to what the heck they were doing. Seemed silly at the time but they knew what was up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, duke of queens said:

U.S. needs to make temperature checks mandatory at all airports(internationally at least). When I was in Taiwan over ten years ago they had them and was dumbfounded as to to what the heck they were doing. Seemed silly at the time but they knew what was up.

That was probably during or after SARS ? This is the second or third go-around for some of these countries so they are already hip to pandemic life. It does seem like a pretty cheap and non-invasive protocol that TSA could add. At least for times like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fletch44 said:

That was probably during or after SARS ? This is the second or third go-around for some of these countries so they are already hip to pandemic life. It does seem like a pretty cheap and non-invasive protocol that TSA could add. At least for times like these.

Yeah might have been. I would not put TSA in charge of anything more than they have on their plate. I had the pleasure of working as a contractor for them and can tell you they are a mess from top to bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JE7HorseGod said:

You can't control the actions of others, but you can control your own actions.

It's just like driving.  Some people are idiots.  And yes sometimes they will wreck into you no matter how safe you are.  But if you are a good driver, practice defensive techniques and are aware of your surroundings you can help mitigate that risk.

 

Wearing a mask is the same as wearing a seatbelt. May not effect you 99% of the time, but if no one wore a seatbelt we would have a driving pandemic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, duke of queens said:

U.S. needs to make temperature checks mandatory at all airports(internationally at least). When I was in Taiwan over ten years ago they had them and was dumbfounded as to to what the heck they were doing. Seemed silly at the time but they knew what was up.

 

Problem is majority of COVID carriers won't have a fever. So maybe you can isolate some people it seems like a huge effort and cost of money for something not very efficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, duke of queens said:

What is your plan for re-opening the economy?

The stock market has been going up and up on the talk of re-opening, looks like everything will be just fine. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DivisionVision said:

The stock market has been going up and up on the talk of re-opening, looks like everything will be just fine. 

 

Unemployment rate just tripled. The stock market is not a good indicator of the economy right now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sidearmer said:

 

Wearing a mask is the same as wearing a seatbelt. May not effect you 99% of the time, but if no one wore a seatbelt we would have a driving pandemic.

Exactly.

Wash you hands and wear a mask just like you wear a seat belt.

You keep six feet apart just like you keep appropriate distance from the car in front of you.

You check your temperature like you check your oil.

The virus is passed by people, you stay cognizant of the people around you just like you stay cognizant of other drivers on the road.

Be aware of your own "check engine light" and don't ignore it.  That sort of thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every few weeks someone brings up that post and it gets no less hilarious every time 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to comment about the hotel issue here in Ca...FWIW, I live in Stockton, in the San Joaquin county, just south of Sacramento, so we get most, if not all of Newsom's appearances on TV updating his efforts, (angers my wife as they've been preempting the only new episode time slot for her favorite show, Judge Judy),  anyway, Gov Newsom started his campaign to protect our homeless here in Ca back in march, starting in Alameda county, mainly the city of Oakland:  https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Coronavirus-and-homelessness-California-buys-15141873.php

He spoke on TV about purchasing hotel rooms for the homeless, "Room key" was his name for that project, as well as other efforts in the battle against what's happening statewide during this crisis....

I have zero knowledge about LA county and their "efforts"? in this, whether or not they're acting under his project guidelines, or acting on their own take. I mean, to my knowledge, those hotels/motels we're discussing are private property, and they're trying to strong arm them into accepting their agenda, no?  They're being offered 3 months of room rental money for empty rooms, but it's their prerogative to either accept or decline. Imagine if you were offered 3 months of rental money for any rooms you have in your home to house the homeless, but you decline for whatever reason, and by declining their offer, they threaten you with public shaming, or even seizure or your private property? it's akin to what they're doing, those hotels/motels are also private property, no? I mean, they can either take the money, house the homeless for 3 months or not. Why should the city council have the power to name those that decline the offer in an effort to shame them?  

If those hotels/motels are empty, perhaps taking the 3month room payments instead of having zero income from them, would be the prudent/moral/humanitarian approach, putting money in pockets in these stressful times is something that a lot of people here are missing, but as far as I'm aware, it's not a law. 

We've seen locally, some offenders of certain laws, prior to this crisis, that have made the blotter reports such as dui's, as well as others, being named in smaller, local newspapers and local tv in an effort to shame them publicly, but this isn't about anyone breaking a law.

I guess my point is that this isn't a new approach at protecting the homeless here, and I haven't heard of any hotels/motels rejecting the proposal in this area. I do acknowledge that our area has not been hit as hard as LA and it's surrounding area, Orange County, and farther south into San Diego and it's surrounding areas,  which are larger than here, with a higher homeless population, that need/should be considered in these times rather than forgotten and pushed aside or simply stepped over.... just pointing out that this approach started back in mid March, but with no threats of exposure to the public for declining the offer of income, but it would be the humanitarian thing to do. Those hotel workers would actually having an income from doing their jobs instead of drawing unemployment( which might be a lot more than they'd make with their actual wages, which could be an incentive NOT to work) but that's a different discussion altogether.

What's the best way to deal with this? Maybe ask the State to step in and set guidelines?? (Shrugs) A state of emergency has not been declared, so IMHO, the city is abusing their power if they are indeed attempting to strong-arm/shame those that choose to decline, in the same manner that the Feds would be viewed if they were forcing people to surrender their private property for any reason that isn't deemed an emergency, which the homeless being left to defend themselves during times like these,"could" be viewed as,(Nope, I'm not a dem, nor a rep, I march to my own drumbeat)...but again, it'd be the humanitarian thing for these hotels/motels to accept and get some of these homeless off the streets for a few months, and then go from there, but forcing/strong-arming them? I don't agree with that tactic

My take anyway.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, FISH ON said:

I want to comment about the hotel issue here in Ca...FWIW, I live in Stockton, in the San Joaquin county, just south of Sacramento, so we get most, if not all of Newsom's appearances on TV updating his efforts, (angers my wife as they've been preempting the only new episode time slot for her favorite show, Judge Judy),  anyway, Gov Newsom started his campaign to protect our homeless here in Ca back in march, starting in Alameda county, mainly the city of Oakland:  https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Coronavirus-and-homelessness-California-buys-15141873.php

He spoke on TV about purchasing hotel rooms for the homeless, "Room key" was his name for that project, as well as other efforts in the battle against what's happening statewide during this crisis....

I have zero knowledge about LA county and their "efforts"? in this, whether or not they're acting under his project guidelines, or acting on their own take. I mean, to my knowledge, those hotels/motels we're discussing are private property, and they're trying to strong arm them into accepting their agenda, no?  They're being offered 3 months of room rental money for empty rooms, but it's their prerogative to either accept or decline. Imagine if you were offered 3 months of rental money for any rooms you have in your home to house the homeless, but you decline for whatever reason, and by declining their offer, they threaten you with public shaming, or even seizure or your private property? it's akin to what they're doing, those hotels/motels are also private property, no? I mean, they can either take the money, house the homeless for 3 months or not. Why should the city council have the power to name those that decline the offer in an effort to shame them?  

If those hotels/motels are empty, perhaps taking the 3month room payments instead of having zero income from them, would be the prudent/moral/humanitarian approach, putting money in pockets in these stressful times is something that a lot of people here are missing, but as far as I'm aware, it's not a law. 

We've seen locally, some offenders of certain laws, prior to this crisis, that have made the blotter reports such as dui's, as well as others, being named in smaller, local newspapers and local tv in an effort to shame them publicly, but this isn't about anyone breaking a law.

I guess my point is that this isn't a new approach at protecting the homeless here, and I haven't heard of any hotels/motels rejecting the proposal in this area. I do acknowledge that our area has not been hit as hard as LA and it's surrounding area, Orange County, and farther south into San Diego and it's surrounding areas,  which are larger than here, with a higher homeless population, that need/should be considered in these times rather than forgotten and pushed aside or simply stepped over.... just pointing out that this approach started back in mid March, but with no threats of exposure to the public for declining the offer of income, but it would be the humanitarian thing to do. Those hotel workers would actually having an income from doing their jobs instead of drawing unemployment( which might be a lot more than they'd make with their actual wages, which could be an incentive NOT to work) but that's a different discussion altogether.

What's the best way to deal with this? Maybe ask the State to step in and set guidelines?? (Shrugs) A state of emergency has not been declared, so IMHO, the city is abusing their power if they are indeed attempting to strong-arm/shame those that choose to decline, in the same manner that the Feds would be viewed if they were forcing people to surrender their private property for any reason that isn't deemed an emergency, which the homeless being left to defend themselves during times like these,"could" be viewed as,(Nope, I'm not a dem, nor a rep, I march to my own drumbeat)...but again, it'd be the humanitarian thing for these hotels/motels to accept and get some of these homeless off the streets for a few months, and then go from there, but forcing/strong-arming them? I don't agree with that tactic

My take anyway.

 


long winded post and admittedly I didn’t read all of it. If I’m reading correctly seems like you feel strongly that hotel owners shouldn’t be forced to shelter the homeless.

 

I totally agree. It should be up to these businesses who they do business with

Edited by UberRebel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll admit in my old age, that I tend to be long-winded, with my lung issues, it's the only way I can be, which pleases my wife..but I digress

main part of the post is that this all started back on Mar 18th, with a 1.1 billion dollar emergency funding, where 100million was earmarked for hotel/motel room rental for the homeless, starting in Alameda co. called "Room Key" by Gov. Newsom.

secondary aspect was my opinion about LA county abusing their power, if they are indeed, attempting to strong-arm those private companies as has been reported, or rather, posted about. ( long winded again? for me to say yes, in part, you are correct) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, UberRebel said:


long winded post and admittedly I didn’t read all of it. If I’m reading correctly seems like you feel strongly that hotel owners shouldn’t be forced to shelter the homeless.

 

I totally agree. It should be up to these businesses who they do business with

If they weren’t receiving public funding that would probably be the case. That’s why they are looking specifically at hotels that have. At that point you are discriminating. City has a right to pull that funding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Sidearmer said:

 

Unemployment rate just tripled. The stock market is not a good indicator of the economy right now.

 

Very true.  Stocks are mainly being floated by all the relief aid.  That will dry up pretty quick.  Our economy was in for a hard recession long before covid was in the picture.

Edited by FouLLine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Exactly.

Wash you hands and wear a mask just like you wear a seat belt.

You keep six feet apart just like you keep appropriate distance from the car in front of you.

You check your temperature like you check your oil.

The virus is passed by people, you stay cognizant of the people around you just like you stay cognizant of other drivers on the road.

Be aware of your own "check engine light" and don't ignore it.  That sort of thing.

 

I just want to say the main reasons for states making masks mandatory is less about preventing you from catching the virus and more about you not spreading the virus.  Yes a mask will lower your chances of infection).  But where the mask really helps is the asymptomatic and presymptomatic people won't be throwing their droplets all over the place.

 

But washing your hands every time you come home kinda thing will help. Covid breaks down easily with soap and water.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Walmart I frequent only had 2 days where they limited the number of shoppers into the store, that was 3 weeks ago, since then, it's been business as it was prior to the outbreak, with zero requirements for masks, even most of the employees don't wear them. Same goes for our Lowes, well, in their favor, they do have plexiglass at the check- out counters, but those lines are a 20-30 minute wait, employees don't wears anything either. This while we rank 3rd in the State as far as county's go in positive tests, active cases and deaths...I'm all hazmat suited up when I go and get stupid looks, I guess it's expected since most of the shoppers are 30 and younger and they feel that they aren't at risk, so why bother?

On the other end of the spectrum, our costco recently made masks mandatory for entrance,  however, as in wallyworld, most younger shoppers simply pull them down after passing through the entrance and go their merry way, coughing in every which direction when they do so, not even bothering to pull them over their mouths and or noses as they're in line to checkout....ANGRY " GET OFF MY LAWN" rant from someone with copd, after having both lungs collapsed in the recent past, making me a high risk baby-boomer..

So while it's said to watch my own lane while driving, you can't always avoid the other drivers, collisions will occur no matter how cautious you are( my main objection while driving isn't the seat-belt law talk earlier here, it's the "texting while driving" and the "on the hand held phone" drivers that cause the most accidents, even after the law was enacted!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-georgia-model-11588967492

 

Good article here. It’s only been 14 days, so it’s still early, but so far the number of daily new cases in the state has continued to decrease. Very encouraging early results. Credit to Dr. Toomey and Gov Kemp for going out on a limb knowing they were going to face criticism. The people of Georgia are looking like they may end up being the beneficiaries of this early action.

 

Let’s hope the trend continues. If it does for another week or two I think other governors will have to start taking notice and more aggressive reopening action. It will only stimulate the economy so much as many consumers will still be scared, but getting people back to work and things opened up will no doubt help economically and people’s mental health. 

 

Remember the original intent of the lockdown was to not overwhelm the healthcare system, not to necessarily bring the case count down to 0. I feel like this gets lost sometimes since so much has happened between then and now and everything regarding the Coronavirus is just so politicized. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, TrueToTheBlue said:

but so far the number of daily new cases in the state has continued to decrease

 

Only if you ignore the manipulation of the numbers, which is no problem at all if you're a WSJ op-ed writer and the manipulation proves the point you're working backwards from:

COVID-19 data from Georgia’s Department of Health could be ‘misleading,’ experts say

Quote

The state health department clarified the way it is counting newly confirmed cases. The measure is tied more closely to when a person begins feeling sick or when a test sample is first collected from a person.

That data, displayed on a chart on the website, may be missing cases from the past two weeks, according to the state health department.

The potentially missing data results in graphs that show Georgia is seeing a sharp decline in new cases over time, although that likely isn’t happening, experts said.

Experts said the state is not clearly explaining its method of reporting new cases, and the chart showing cases over time could be misleading or confusing the public.

 

My favorite part, not mentioned in the article, is that the chart with a 7-day moving average includes the current day, which isn't over yet.  Really nice way to illustrate the downward trend you're looking for.

This AJC article has a nice animation to illustrate how the data's being manipulated:

Quote

How case numbers change

COVID-19 cases reported by the Department of Public Health have begun shifting over time because of a change in how the agency records cases. Georgia now dates a confirmed case by the day symptoms began or a test was taken. But it can take days or even a week or more for the final test result to be reported. That means the most recent days will show artificially low case numbers until they are updated. Here's how case numbers have shifted for one week this month.

cases by day change

 

In other words, you can pretty much ignore the last 5 days or so of that one week trend that the WSJ is so eager to take a victory lap on.  That's not to say the post-reopening trend is worse, or that reopening in certain areas isn't the right call -- but you can't use this phony data to make that determination.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should dive into the missteps of media darling Cuomo, who refused to close the busiest city in the world quickly, argued with Trump when Trump suggested the feds might make the decision if he wasn’t willing to, and now the whole nursing home problem. Yikes. I wonder why we’re so quick to bash one, and crickets on the other. 🤔

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

I think we should dive into the missteps of media darling Cuomo, who refused to close the busiest city in the world quickly, argued with Trump when Trump suggested the feds might make the decision if he wasn’t willing to, and now the whole nursing home problem. Yikes. I wonder why we’re so quick to bash one, and crickets on the other. 🤔

 

Nah, Cuomo did a terrible job as well.  I feel like I've bashed him here before, but if not, here's your "missteps":

Seattle’s Leaders Let Scientists Take the Lead. New York’s Did Not

The only reason Cuomo has the image he does is because de Blasio was so much worse.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Nah, Cuomo did a terrible job as well.  I feel like I've bashed him here before, but if not, here's your "missteps":

Seattle’s Leaders Let Scientists Take the Lead. New York’s Did Not

The only reason Cuomo has the image he does is because de Blasio was so much worse.

Fair. When deBlasio and Trump are the others talking, he SOUNDS like the adult in the room.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

I think we should dive into the missteps of media darling Cuomo, who refused to close the busiest city in the world quickly, argued with Trump when Trump suggested the feds might make the decision if he wasn’t willing to, and now the whole nursing home problem. Yikes. I wonder why we’re so quick to bash one, and crickets on the other. 🤔

As a New Yorker, it drives me crazy to hear Cuomo being praised for his role in the situation. He comes across as very honest and measured in his press briefings, but his actions (or lack there of) throughout this process have been abhorrent. I have no horse in this race. There’s plenty of blame to go around.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, meh2 said:

As a New Yorker, it drives me crazy to hear Cuomo being praised for his role in the situation. He comes across as very honest and measured in his press briefings, but his actions (or lack there of) throughout this process have been abhorrent. I have no horse in this race. There’s plenty of blame to go around.

 

It's been very odd, even by the standards of the media.  His old tweets, in which he's basically telling everyone to hold an orgy in central park and spit in each other's mouths, are right there.  Not to mention the fact that he's slashing healthcare programs as this happens.  Then they talk about how his response proves he should be president.

 

Just occurred to me that this is how Bush, but even more on point, Giuliani were venerated after 9/11.  I think a lot of the media 1) live in NY or view it as the center of the world. 2) Are wealthy and insulated from reality. 3) Their idea of effectively handing a situation is looking good/ feeling like a daddy figure, in the media. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, GamblorLA said:

 

It's been very odd, even by the standards of the media.  His old tweets, in which he's basically telling everyone to hold an orgy in central park and spit in each other's mouths, are right there.  Not to mention the fact that he's slashing healthcare programs as this happens.  Then they talk about how his response proves he should be president.

 

Just occurred to me that this is how Bush, but even more on point, Giuliani were venerated after 9/11.  I think a lot of the media 1) live in NY or view it as the center of the world. 2) Are wealthy and insulated from reality. 3) Their idea of effectively handing a situation is looking good/ feeling like a daddy figure, in the media. 

Wilhelm eats pizza with a knife and fork. Need I say anymore.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Backdoor Slider said:

I think we should dive into the missteps of media darling Cuomo, who refused to close the busiest city in the world quickly, argued with Trump when Trump suggested the feds might make the decision if he wasn’t willing to, and now the whole nursing home problem. Yikes. I wonder why we’re so quick to bash one, and crickets on the other. 🤔

Probably because most media companies are owned by Democrats and they don’t want people voting for Republicans. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.