|
Think we screwed up
Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. -- Freedom Isn't Free! |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. Wait until summer and I bet lots more people will be questioning this "rule by panic" path we have taken. |
Think we screwed up
On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On 4/3/20 10:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations ofÂ* scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions.Â* Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. -- Freedom Isn't Free! |
Think we screwed up
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 4/3/20 10:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. Littlt ****bird you can't make this political. -- .. ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
Think we screwed up
On 4/3/2020 4:24 PM, John wrote:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. If you believe the Swedish model, it wouldn't be much different in terms of deaths per million. Biggest difference would be that businesses and the economy wouldn't be shut down. Wouldn't be a need for up to $600 trillion dollars (that's what the package passed by Congress really amounts to) to be committed to shore up airlines, pay unemployment benefits and give grants to small businesses as incentives to hang on. We wouldn't be trying to test over 300 million people and we wouldn't be trying to buy 100's of thousands of ventilators (that don't exist) in a matter of weeks. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message: I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. Littlt ****bird you can't make this political. You're a trip. *Everything* Trump says and does is political, aimed at pumping up his chances for re-election. He is the worst human being to ever hold high political office in this country. I know you right-wing deplorables love him for how well he insults every group and country and idea you hate, but that will all make it worse for everyone in the USA. I wonder how he will fare in the New Trump Economy with record high unemployment, business failures, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead, a tanked stock market, and plenty of legitimate evidence pointing a lot of the blame at him, his lies about the pandemic, and his delays to take strong action...and the lies and delays continue. |
Think we screwed up
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. Littlt ****bird you can't make this political. You're a trip. *Everything* Trump says and does is political, aimed at pumping up his chances for re-election. He is the worst human being to ever hold high political office in this country. I know you right-wing deplorables love him for how well he insults every group and country and idea you hate, but that will all make it worse for everyone in the USA. I wonder how he will fare in the New Trump Economy with record high unemployment, business failures, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead, a tanked stock market, and plenty of legitimate evidence pointing a lot of the blame at him, his lies about the pandemic, and his delays to take strong action...and the lies and delays continue. ESAD -- .. ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:16:39 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/3/20 10:56 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations ofÂ* scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions.Â* Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. If you believe the most extreme guesses, there will be fewer deaths than they predict. The real way to tell is to start with 2.8 million that will die in any given year and see where it goes from there. |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:24:00 -0400, John wrote:
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. I think what Sweden is saying is you can be careful without completely shutting down everything. In real life we are not really keeping people at home. We are just limiting where they can go. Yesterday Walmart was a zoo ... pretty much just like normal. The Publix is pretty busy too, in spite of not having much there. Ace Hardware was a little slower than usual. I am washing everything that comes in the house now with something. If it is something that can take it, I spray it with denatured alcohol. |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? |
Think we screwed up
On 4/3/2020 9:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:24:00 -0400, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. I think what Sweden is saying is you can be careful without completely shutting down everything. In real life we are not really keeping people at home. We are just limiting where they can go. Yesterday Walmart was a zoo ... pretty much just like normal. The Publix is pretty busy too, in spite of not having much there. Ace Hardware was a little slower than usual. I am washing everything that comes in the house now with something. If it is something that can take it, I spray it with denatured alcohol. Back in January, a week before Trump banned travel from China, Doc Fauci said in an interview with Newsweek that the coronavirus: "is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about." He also commented that it "would be like the flu". Yesterday he's was on CNN saying that he can't understand why the entire United States hasn't been put on a mandatory lock-down. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations of scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions. Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. === I think you're assuming that a "one size fits all" strategy would be appropriate for the entire country. The numbers indicate that there are big differences in the rate of hospitalizations depending mostly on population density and propensity for travel. High density areas like the northeast are totally overwhelmed in just a few weeks time while lightly populated areas are getting by just fine, at least so far. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 7:18:06 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. Littlt ****bird you can't make this political. You're a trip. *Everything* Trump says and does is political, aimed at pumping up his chances for re-election. He is the worst human being to ever hold high political office in this country. I know you right-wing deplorables love him for how well he insults every group and country and idea you hate, but that will all make it worse for everyone in the USA. I wonder how he will fare in the New Trump Economy with record high unemployment, business failures, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead, a tanked stock market, and plenty of legitimate evidence pointing a lot of the blame at him, his lies about the pandemic, and his delays to take strong action...and the lies and delays continue. Wow, Harry. looks like you've gotten it all figured out. Another George Orwell you are... |
Think we screwed up
On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
On 4/4/20 8:03 AM, Tim wrote:
On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 7:18:06 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: I suppose everyone is entitled to whatever conjectures float their boat. I have no idea how many in this country will die, and neither does anyone else. But...if it is less than some of the scientists predict, you can be sure Trump will take credit for less deaths than predicted. Littlt ****bird you can't make this political. You're a trip. *Everything* Trump says and does is political, aimed at pumping up his chances for re-election. He is the worst human being to ever hold high political office in this country. I know you right-wing deplorables love him for how well he insults every group and country and idea you hate, but that will all make it worse for everyone in the USA. I wonder how he will fare in the New Trump Economy with record high unemployment, business failures, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead, a tanked stock market, and plenty of legitimate evidence pointing a lot of the blame at him, his lies about the pandemic, and his delays to take strong action...and the lies and delays continue. Wow, Harry. looks like you've gotten it all figured out. Another George Orwell you are... You are religious, Tim. Therefore, you are predisposed to believe Trump's bull****. |
Think we screwed up
On 4/4/20 3:02 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/3/2020 9:41 PM, wrote: On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:24:00 -0400, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations ofÂ* scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions.Â* Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. I think what Sweden is saying is you can be careful without completely shutting down everything. In real life we are not really keeping people at home. We are just limiting where they can go. Yesterday Walmart was a zoo ... pretty much just like normal. The Publix is pretty busy too, in spite of not having much there. Ace Hardware was a little slower than usual. I am washing everything that comes in the house now with something. If it is something that can take it, I spray it with denatured alcohol. Back in January, a week before Trump banned travel from China, Doc Fauci said in an interview with Newsweek that the coronavirus: "is not a major threat to the peopleÂ* of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."Â* He also commented that it "would be like the flu". Yesterday he's was on CNN saying that he can't understand why the entire United States hasn't been put on a mandatory lock-down. That's how science works...you learn new things and you adjust your thinking. Well, some people adjust, but not all... https://i.ibb.co/X2yfz76/C59-DE935-8...60-B627636.jpg |
Think we screwed up
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T Oh, oh. |
Think we screwed up
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/4/20 3:02 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:41 PM, wrote: On Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:24:00 -0400, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 13:41:14 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/3/2020 12:31 PM, John wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 10:56:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Politics aside, I think maybe the collective actions taken by everyone, including government officials, have been an over-reaction driven by public fear and panic. The recommendations ofÂ* scientists who's lifetime work has been studying epidemics and pandemics have driven the reactions.Â* Their input is very important and valuable but it has to considered from the standpoint that it comes from a narrow field of view with limited regard to other factors like how their academic recommendations affect the overall economic status of the country. As more "granular data" is crunched, analyzed and announced to the public and to government officials, the situation seems only to worsen. Sweden took a different approach. They issued recommendations that those at high risk take precautions to isolate themselves. Logical, not emotional or panic driven. They recommended "social distance" protocols for the rest and hand washing, etc. They recommended avoiding groups of 50 or more. But, they did *not* shut down schools, businesses, restaurants, etc. for the rest of the public. They emphasized the responsibility the public has to avoid becoming infected as best they can while recognizing that over 80 percent of those who *do* become infected will recover, most with no need for hospitalization. As of this morning Sweden, with a population of just over 10 million, has 5568 confirmed cases with 308 deaths. Wondering if this approach would have been more appropriate. Interestingly, California seems to have successfully "flattened the curve" yet testing in California lags well behind other "hot spot" sections of the country. We have 784 cases per million and Sweden has 607 cases per million. It's not like they're that much better off than we are, and I'll bet their inner city population pays much better attention to directions than ours does. Compare our cases per million to Italy, Spain, Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, and the list goes on. https://www.worldometers.info/corona...IIsE#countries I'm wondering if Sweden won't start climbing the curve pretty soon. There may not be that much difference in terms of cases per million but they have not shut their country and economy down like we have. In that respect they are *much* better off than we are. Even more reason to believe we may have gone about this wrong. I guess the big question is how bad it would have been if we *didn't* shut down. I think what Sweden is saying is you can be careful without completely shutting down everything. In real life we are not really keeping people at home. We are just limiting where they can go. Yesterday Walmart was a zoo ... pretty much just like normal. The Publix is pretty busy too, in spite of not having much there. Ace Hardware was a little slower than usual. I am washing everything that comes in the house now with something. If it is something that can take it, I spray it with denatured alcohol. Back in January, a week before Trump banned travel from China, Doc Fauci said in an interview with Newsweek that the coronavirus: "is not a major threat to the peopleÂ* of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."Â* He also commented that it "would be like the flu". Yesterday he's was on CNN saying that he can't understand why the entire United States hasn't been put on a mandatory lock-down. That's how science works...you learn new things and you adjust your thinking. Well, some people adjust, but not all... https://i.ibb.co/X2yfz76/C59-DE935-8...60-B627636.jpg I guess you are Liberal Arts, not Scientific. You never adjust your thinking. |
Think we screwed up
On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 02:51:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many. It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. Since the entire world GDP is only $81T or so it sounds like a made up number to me. |
Think we screwed up
On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 08:08:39 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T I agree that may be an accurate number by the time Stimulus II gets here. Nancy is already getting it ready and I imagine it is a rehash of the bill that got shouted down last month. |
Think we screwed up
On 4/4/2020 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 08:08:39 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T I agree that may be an accurate number by the time Stimulus II gets here. Nancy is already getting it ready and I imagine it is a rehash of the bill that got shouted down last month. Based on what I've heard several lawmakers say, the $6T number will end up being what is spent under the $2T bill they just passed. I don't completely understand how that will happen but that's what some are saying. THey should hold off on any more spending on this until we see what results the current bill produces. Those who are calling for the Fed Government to "fix" everything apparently don't realize how horribly inefficient the Fed is to do *anything". Individual states have much better means to get help to those who need it. Plus, that's how our system of government is supposed to work. The fed can provide help and $$ but it is **** poor in managing it's distribution simply due to it's size, inertia and bureaucratic structure. Cuomo is getting away with doing things with less official "authority" than the POTUS can. Anything Trump tries to do is met with lawsuits and negative blasts from Congress led by Pelosi and others. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
Keyser Soze
On 4/4/20 8:03 AM, Tim wrote: On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 7:18:06 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: - show quoted text - You are religious, Tim. Therefore, you are predisposed to believe Trump's bull****. “ You are A lunitic, Harry. Therefore you are predisposed to believing you’re own made up connotations |
Think we screwed up
On 4/4/2020 12:33 PM, Tim wrote:
Keyser Soze On 4/4/20 8:03 AM, Tim wrote: On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 7:18:06 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: - show quoted text - You are religious, Tim. Therefore, you are predisposed to believe Trump's bull****. “ You are A lunitic, Harry. Therefore you are predisposed to believing you’re own made up connotations Tim, I am 100% convinced that Harry's modus operandi is one of two things: 1. He says what he says because it's a form of recreation for him. He loves to stir the pot and see everyone's reactions. I am not 100% sure even *he* really believes in some of the stuff he posts. or: 2. He's a nutcase like Nomen. Hope he and Nomen are getting along in my Bozo Bin. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com |
Think we screwed up
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/4/2020 12:16 PM, wrote: On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 08:08:39 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T I agree that may be an accurate number by the time Stimulus II gets here. Nancy is already getting it ready and I imagine it is a rehash of the bill that got shouted down last month. Based on what I've heard several lawmakers say, the $6T number will end up being what is spent under the $2T bill they just passed. I don't completely understand how that will happen but that's what some are saying. THey should hold off on any more spending on this until we see what results the current bill produces. Those who are calling for the Fed Government to "fix" everything apparently don't realize how horribly inefficient the Fed is to do *anything". Individual states have much better means to get help to those who need it. Plus, that's how our system of government is supposed to work. The fed can provide help and $$ but it is **** poor in managing it's distribution simply due to it's size, inertia and bureaucratic structure. Cuomo is getting away with doing things with less official "authority" than the POTUS can. Anything Trump tries to do is met with lawsuits and negative blasts from Congress led by Pelosi and others. What would Pelosi do if Trump said to confiscate PPE and ventilators from private hospitals? Not be praised like Coumo. |
Think we screwed up
On Saturday, April 4, 2020 at 11:42:52 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/4/2020 12:33 PM, Tim wrote: Keyser Soze On 4/4/20 8:03 AM, Tim wrote: On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 7:18:06 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote: On 4/3/20 4:44 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote: Keyser Soze Wrote in message: - show quoted text - You are religious, Tim. Therefore, you are predisposed to believe Trump's bull****. “ You are A lunitic, Harry. Therefore you are predisposed to believing you’re own made up connotations Tim, I am 100% convinced that Harry's modus operandi is one of two things: 1. He says what he says because it's a form of recreation for him. He loves to stir the pot and see everyone's reactions. I am not 100% sure even *he* really believes in some of the stuff he posts. or: 2. He's a nutcase like Nomen. Hope he and Nomen are getting along in my Bozo Bin. -- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com Very good, Richard. But also, lets not exclude the 'all the above' option as well. |
Think we screwed up
On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 12:31:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 4/4/2020 12:16 PM, wrote: On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 08:08:39 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many.Â* It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T I agree that may be an accurate number by the time Stimulus II gets here. Nancy is already getting it ready and I imagine it is a rehash of the bill that got shouted down last month. Based on what I've heard several lawmakers say, the $6T number will end up being what is spent under the $2T bill they just passed. I don't completely understand how that will happen but that's what some are saying. A bill this big will have back end expenses not in the original appropriation. 3X is scary but who knows. Things like how much of the PPP debt gets forgiven will push that number up but I suspect there are other time bombs in there. THey should hold off on any more spending on this until we see what results the current bill produces. I think they may be looking at another $1200 check if this kicks out into May. The bill won't be that clean tho. Nancy will try to pack in things like the airfare tax and the election insanity. Those who are calling for the Fed Government to "fix" everything apparently don't realize how horribly inefficient the Fed is to do *anything". Individual states have much better means to get help to those who need it. Plus, that's how our system of government is supposed to work. The fed can provide help and $$ but it is **** poor in managing it's distribution simply due to it's size, inertia and bureaucratic structure. Cuomo is getting away with doing things with less official "authority" than the POTUS can. Anything Trump tries to do is met with lawsuits and negative blasts from Congress led by Pelosi and others. Cuomo would take every mask, glove and ventilator in the country if we let him. |
Think we screwed up
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
wrote: On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 12:31:54 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/4/2020 12:16 PM, wrote: On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 08:08:39 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 4/4/2020 2:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 4/3/2020 9:43 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:47:48 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: $600 trillion dollars How do you get from $2.2T to $600T? It's how it has been explained by many. It's leveraging the base of 2.1T to what it will end up being. It's beyond my head to try to explain it. whoops ... got trigger happy with the 0's Meant to say $6T I agree that may be an accurate number by the time Stimulus II gets here. Nancy is already getting it ready and I imagine it is a rehash of the bill that got shouted down last month. Based on what I've heard several lawmakers say, the $6T number will end up being what is spent under the $2T bill they just passed. I don't completely understand how that will happen but that's what some are saying. A bill this big will have back end expenses not in the original appropriation. 3X is scary but who knows. Things like how much of the PPP debt gets forgiven will push that number up but I suspect there are other time bombs in there. THey should hold off on any more spending on this until we see what results the current bill produces. I think they may be looking at another $1200 check if this kicks out into May. The bill won't be that clean tho. Nancy will try to pack in things like the airfare tax and the election insanity. Those who are calling for the Fed Government to "fix" everything apparently don't realize how horribly inefficient the Fed is to do *anything". Individual states have much better means to get help to those who need it. Plus, that's how our system of government is supposed to work. The fed can provide help and $$ but it is **** poor in managing it's distribution simply due to it's size, inertia and bureaucratic structure. Cuomo is getting away with doing things with less official "authority" than the POTUS can. Anything Trump tries to do is met with lawsuits and negative blasts from Congress led by Pelosi and others. Cuomo would take every mask, glove and ventilator in the country if we let him. Too bad Trump doesn+IBk-t feel for the people of the United States as Cuomofeels for New Yorkers.-- Posted with my iPad Pro Give us a break deadbeat. You know we know all about you, don't you? -- .. ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com