3 serious issues

[Rattler]

We are on the same page then.  That's what I've been saying from the start.  I have experienced quite a bit of animosity for it though.  Mainly regarding the idea of reopening.  Apparently that is not an option for some folks.

[Rattler]

[Rattler]

Do lock downs work?  The data doesn't support them.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/70165-video-the-most-expensive-experiment-in-us-history-is-a-failure-2020-04-24?mailing_id=5013&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5013&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

[knehrke]

Lock downs are not what works. Social distancing does work. Unfortunately, when social distancing was "recommended", people ignored it. In Sweden, they listened. But I bet folks are smart enough after having seen the tragedies occurring all over the world that they're listening now, even in states without a lock down. I know that I gave up licking doorknobs back in mid-April.

Carson Tucker is selectively filtering the data and ignoring numbers that don't fit his view. Both sides are guilty of this. In his case, the numbers ignore experience. If you see three or four people hit by cars trying to cross the street, do you try to cross? You likely think twice, anyway, and look both ways first. That's what's happening in places where there are no lockdowns. They were further along in the timeline of the outbreak and they (seemingly) learned from the experience of early victims. There is a lesson to be learned, but it's not the one he's teaching.

I found an interesting site produced by the founders of Instagram that has real time updates of the R0 values for each state: https://rt.live/

I won't spoil the surprise. Look and decide for yourself. What is really interesting is how the R0 changes over time, particularly after a lockdown is implemented. I know that it is becoming vogue to argue that this was a mistake. But arguing from the perspective that lockdowns aren't effective at halting the spread of a virus dilutes the impact of anything else you would say. I would walk back the blanket statement and argue instead that lockdowns are less effective in certain circumstances, and we need to learn what those circumstances are in order to balance their use with the economic devastation they cause. 

[Rattler]

2 hours ago, knehrke said:

What is really interesting is how the R0 changes over time, particularly after a lock down is implemented.

But you must also take into consideration regular social distancing practices and regular mask usage also started when most lock downs were implemented.  How is that factored out of the impact on the data?  Was it necessary to go beyond masks and distancing to achieve these numbers?

[crappyice]

Lock downs are not what works. Social distancing does work. Unfortunately, when social distancing was "recommended", people ignored it. In Sweden, they listened. But I bet folks are smart enough after having seen the tragedies occurring all over the world that they're listening now, even in states without a lock down. I know that I gave up licking doorknobs back in mid-April.
Carson Tucker is selectively filtering the data and ignoring numbers that don't fit his view. Both sides are guilty of this. In his case, the numbers ignore experience. If you see three or four people hit by cars trying to cross the street, do you try to cross? You likely think twice, anyway, and look both ways first. That's what's happening in places where there are no lockdowns. They were further along in the timeline of the outbreak and they (seemingly) learned from the experience of early victims. There is a lesson to be learned, but it's not the one he's teaching.
I found an interesting site produced by the founders of Instagram that has real time updates of the R0 values for each state: https://rt.live/
I won't spoil the surprise. Look and decide for yourself. What is really interesting is how the R0 changes over time, particularly after a lockdown is implemented. I know that it is becoming vogue to argue that this was a mistake. But arguing from the perspective that lockdowns aren't effective at halting the spread of a virus dilutes the impact of anything else you would say. I would walk back the blanket statement and argue instead that lockdowns are less effective in certain circumstances, and we need to learn what those circumstances are in order to balance their use with the economic devastation they cause. 

Thank you knehrke(what the hells a knehrke by the way) for eloquently informing a quite polarizing topic. Sometimes people in these “discussions” like to just take their ball to their corner after lobbing some bombs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[knehrke]

knehrke stands for keith nehrke. But a nehrke is a cross between a nerd and a turkey lol. I've had folks come up to me and say, "I saw you speak at some meeting/seminar ten years ago, you're the nerd-turkey guy!" Hey, whatever works...

Rattler - good points, and probably not - masking and distancing alone should have been sufficient. The lock downs IMHO were warranted (or unwarranted, depending on your opinion), because too many folks openly snubbed masks and social distancing. In some ways, we are our own worst enemy.

It also seems that in some cases it's impossible to do so in a workplace environment. We had no issues in my lab, but like many others, we were shut down. Voluntary compliance would have been preferable. One big issue is the extent to which employers would have heeded the necessary measures, were it to have remained voluntary - employees may have been on board, but their workplace not so much. A buddy of mine who works at a local water authority (essential business) had to come up with a list of ten things to keep the workplace safe, after his bosses weren't acting fast enough. Simple stuff, like having your own keyboard and mouse for use with shared computers. 

Edited April 25, 2020 by knehrke

[Rattler]

[Rattler]

We are using disposable gloves at the keyboard and mouse.

[Rattler]

"I think it's time to consider the possibility ... that this lockdown — as opposed to the more moderate mitigation efforts — is a colossal public policy calamity." —Brit Hume

[Merlot]

Seems odd to me that when there is the occasional government shutdown, there is an absolute panic by some of our political class when even one non essential government worker is thrown out of work, but no problem when 24 million are out of a job. Time to end this madness. 

Quarantine and protect the elderly and sick and then open up society. We'll be fine.

[Rattler]

Does anyone remember about March 17th time frame when Cuomo talked about taking your children to a state park?

It's not about the virus anymore (if it ever was). Camping is probably one of the healthiest, most active outdoor activities people can do. Utterly ridiculous and shows how out of touch him and his administration is with Upstate New York's lifestyle.

 

[Rattler]

The Labor Department released weekly numbers on jobless claims today, and as everyone anticipated, it's another horrible report. Some 4.4 million Americans filed for unemployment last week, bringing the total number of jobless claims since the China Virus pandemic shut down the nation up to 26.4 million. For shocking perspective, the U.S. has now erased all job gains since the Great Recession, and it happened in just five weeks. Is it any wonder people have been protesting the lockdown measures across several states?

CNBC reports, "With virtually all other economic indicators pointing to the worst downturn since the Great Depression, jobless claims are seen as the most current way of measuring how deeply conditions have been impacted by social distancing associated with the coronavirus. The total is far worse than anything the U.S. has seen before, with the previous one-week peak of 695,000 dating back to October 1982."

While the initial wave of jobless claims primarily came from the lower-income service, restaurant, and hotel industries, that's changing. Bloomberg notes, "White-collar employees largely escaped the initial wave of coronavirus layoffs, often because the nature of their jobs meant it was easier to do them from home. But even companies that managed to stay afloat have seen a big squeeze on revenue and profits, as large areas of the economy are shuttered. That's triggering a second round of job cuts or furloughs, with office workers taking a bigger hit this time."

Democrats are obtuse, as usual. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo was questioned during a press conference about the growing economic crisis that has resulted from his continued lockdown order. He lashed out by suggesting that, in lieu of protesting, laid-off workers "go take a job as an essential worker" because hardship "doesn't equal death."

As bad as that was, America's favorite socialist, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, was arguably even more out of touch. AOC once again displayed her complete ignorance of basic economics as she argued, "When we talk about this idea of reopening society, you know, only in America does the president — when the president tweets about 'liberation' — does he mean 'go back to work.' When we have this discussion about going back or reopening, I think a lot people should just say, 'No, we're not going back to that.'" She then ridiculously asserted, "We're not going back to working 70-hour weeks just so that we could put food on the table and not even feel any sort of semblance of security in our lives." Evidently, AOC believes that the relationship between working and earning money is either entirely coincidental or flat-out oppressive. In her case, the former might be understandable, as she receives a $174,000 annual taxpayer-funded salary no matter what she does or doesn't do.

Finally, everyone needs to brace themselves, as this economic crisis looks to be closer to the beginning than the end. And you can bet the Democrats are readying Joe Biden's campaign to push for the biggest "tax the rich" campaign in generations. They will use the economic shock, massive job losses, and debt as fodder for an enormous surge of the Left's political playbook favorite — class warfare.

[GreeneHunter]

2 hours ago, Rattler said:

The Labor Department — class warfare.

For most people its ten (10) words or less to get your point across .... after ten (10) most people just move on ! Just so you know . (soap box? )

[Rattler]

Like the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence?  You can't make a complicated point in 10 words or less.  Besides people keep demanding details, sources and proof.  I promise you, there won't be a test afterwards.

BTW- it's not the Labor Dept that's pushing class warfare,

Edited April 28, 2020 by Rattler