Canada2017 said:

---

Predictions weren't 'wrong'.

Social distancing is working .

---

The models assumed social distancing through August. That a common circular response, but the models have that baked in.

Models constantly adjust do to unforeseen events .

If a drug treatment regime is found to be successful....the models will be adjusted again .

If the virus evolves into a more virulent strain this fall....another adjustment will be made .

Oldbear83 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Nice virtue signalling there, bear2be2

And way to play the hypocrite-but-hiding-it by throwing blame just seconds after admitting the people making decisions did so with incomplete information, and with the recognition that the 'experts' were wrong in their own initial projections.

---

What are you babbling about? Unless you're one of the science-denying dip****s I'm talking about, and your butthurt protestations to every post I make make me wonder, move on. And if you are one of those clowns, debate the content of my post.

I'd love to see you defend the logic of ignoring data to avoid having to admit you were wrong and spreading wrong-headed nonsense that's now been proven to be such.

---

You are a damned hypocrite, just as bad as the people you attack, but you want to sell yourself as an objective observer.

The mask don't fit, mister.

Yes, I'm partisan, but I go after both sides when I see something really out of line, excepting the ones who ignore any attempt at reason - it just wastes effort trying to reason with a mad dog.

---

I do call out both sides. There are just far fewer hard left ideologues than hard right ones in this largely Trump Republican echo chamber, and the ones who post the most aren't worth engaging in most cases. I don't respond to Florida Mike's bull**** for the same reason.

But I criticize the Democratic Party and its operatives all the time. I have no more devotion or obligation to that tribe as I do to the Republicans. In fact, I think both are full of self-serving *******s who have largely proven terrible at governing our country. And the partisan divide they've gone to great lengths to foster and increase is IMO destroying this nation.

So if it seems like I call out the right more than the left, that's only because there's a lot more right wing silliness to call out here than the opposite. I'd be and come off just as critical if the ideological majority was reversed.

I am a true moderate who is tired of watching the two parties in this country take turns ****ing things up. And since I have no voice in either party -- my preferred candidates are called RINOs or DINOs in every primary -- I'll voice my opinions here as I please.

Canada2017 said:

---

Models constantly adjust do to unforeseen events .

If a drug treatment regime is found to be successful....the models will be adjusted again .

If the virus evolves into a more virulent strain this fall....another adjustment will be made .

---

I understand. That does not mean we should not objectively evaluate the models upon which we base public policy decisions.

Agreed

No one will respond directly. It will either be ad home, ignore, or ask another question. But here goes:
1. Who would be willing to lose his / her job?
2. Who would be willing to sacrifice Baylor athletics?
3. Who would be willing to lose a spouse's job?
4. Who would be willing to lose their home?
5. Who would be willing to lose $25K? $50K? $100K? $500K? $1M?

We talk in emotional abstracts, but if you knew the current situation shutdown would do 1-5 to you, would you still support the shutdown?

(Please don't be a simpleton and respond with "If your family member or you would die from Kung Flu, would you ....")

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

Social distancing and time has been the effective solution globally.

No one has tried the mask for everyone. It seem plausible (to me) that if you have on a mask and it reduce your spray by 90% and I have a mask and it reduces my spray that together we reduce our chances of infecting each other.

Id have done it.

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I'd like to see a post-mortem study done once this is all over with as well, but I don't really see how anyone can deny at this point that things would have been significantly worse without action.

And I think the best evidence for that is a growing global mortality rate (up to about 6 percent now on confirmed cases) that is significantly higher than average in the countries that were hit hardest by this pandemic. If the mortality rate is at or above 10 percent in those places with preventive action taken, it only stands to reason that it would have been significantly worse without any. And you have to assume that it would have been far more wide spread as well, making it likely that all of the world's major cities would have been hit and had their medical facilities compromised before all was done.

You can also look at our country's fight for medical supplies and imagine how much more dire that would be if more of our major city's were being impacted.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

---

That's fine. I'm not following you around and misrepresenting your opinions to a bunch of like-minded people -- causing them to do the same in future conversations. If I disagree with you, I'll tell you. But my response to you will be directly related to something you've said on this board. I ask that you return that favor.

bear2be2 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

---

That's fine. I'm not following you around and misrepresenting your opinions to a bunch of like-minded people -- causing them to do the same in future conversations. If I disagree with you, I'll tell you. But my response to you will be directly related to something you've said on this board. I ask that you return that favor.

---

Has he called you a fascist yet?

Osodecentx said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

---

That's fine. I'm not following you around and misrepresenting your opinions to a bunch of like-minded people -- causing them to do the same in future conversations. If I disagree with you, I'll tell you. But my response to you will be directly related to something you've said on this board. I ask that you return that favor.

---

Has he called you a fascist yet?

---

No, because bear2be2 has not acted the way you have.

It's not that hard, pal. Act like Mussolini, get called Mussolini.

Kyle said:

---

No one will respond directly. It will either be ad home, ignore, or ask another question. But here goes:
1. Who would be willing to lose his / her job?
2. Who would be willing to sacrifice Baylor athletics?
3. Who would be willing to lose a spouse's job?
4. Who would be willing to lose their home?
5. Who would be willing to lose $25K? $50K? $100K? $500K? $1M?

We talk in emotional abstracts, but if you knew the current situation shutdown would do 1-5 to you, would you still support the shutdown?

(Please don't be a simpleton and respond with "If your family member or you would die from Kung Flu, would you ....")

---

First, I want to apologize for being uncivil in some of my previous posts. That's not productive or constructive. If I'm going to call for good faith discussion on this board, I need to do a better job of modeling it. So I'm sorry for being a dick.

As to the content of your post, I'd just say two things. First, your premise offers us a choice we didn't/don't really have. And second, you act like these questions are hypothetical when, for many, they're not.

To the first point, it doesn't really matter what we would be willing to do regarding our employment. That's not a choice we're being given by this virus. Left unchecked, COVID-19 would devastate every major city the way it has New York City, New Orleans, Detroit, etc, if not worse. And this virus has proven the harder it hits a community, the higher the mortality rate. So let's be conservative here and assume that America's current mortality rate of 3.6 percent holds in perpetuity. If just 20 percent of the U.S. population contracted this disease (another conservative estimate in a burn-through situation), you'd be looking at almost two million deaths. Now assume that the existing data holds and -- as our medical facilities are overwhelmed and resources are depleted -- that mortality increases to the 10-plus percent that Italy, Spain, France and the United Kingdom are experiencing. That's the type of devastation that would shut the workforce down involuntarily and for a longer period of time.

To the second point, a lot of people have already had these things happen. It wasn't a choice or a thought exercise for them. It was a fact of life and, sadly, an unavoidable one as I've pointed out above.

It's hard to deal with, but I think we just have to acknowledge that we've been served a **** sandwich. There's no good outcome here. You're just trying to avoid the worst outcome. And when talking about deaths in the millions, I think it's pretty obvious what that is.

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

Booray said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

---

What's happening in Sweden? I must have missed that.

bear2be2 said:

---

Booray said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

---

What's happening in Sweden? I must have missed that.

---

Spoiler alert: They don't destroy their economy and starve out families with small kids.

bear2be2 said:

---

Booray said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

---

What's happening in Sweden? I must have missed that.

---

They have adopted the protect the vulnerable, life goes on elsewhere approach.

https://time.com/5817412/sweden-coronavirus/

Bearitto said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Booray said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

---

What's happening in Sweden? I must have missed that.

---

Spoiler alert: They don't destroy their economy and starve out families with small kids.

---

Fascinating that for years Sweden was praised for their Socialism by the Progressive Left yet today the United States is suddenly a whole lot more Socialist than they are. My, my how quickly things can change!

Canada2017 said:

---

Predictions weren't 'wrong'.

Social distancing is working .

---

These projections were already assuming social distancing...and they were wrong.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Predictions weren't 'wrong'.

Social distancing is working .

---

These projections were already assuming social distancing...and they were wrong.

---

You aren't ever going to convince the economy killers and kid starvers they were wrong. Most of them are too busy cashing their social security checks to care, anyway. Just let it go.

Bearitto said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Booray said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I am interested to see how things turn out in Sweden.

---

What's happening in Sweden? I must have missed that.

---

Spoiler alert: They don't destroy their economy and starve out families with small kids.

---

So far, Sweden has a mortality rate of 8.7 percent, which is significantly higher than its Scandinavian neighbors Norway (1.5 percent), Finland (1.7 percent) and Denmark (3.4 percent). It will be interesting to see what percentage of that country's 10 million citizens are infected. If it's significantly higher than those practicing social distancing, they will experience far more devastating results.

That said, there are a lot of factors that make Sweden a really bad test case for the United States. Stockholm is the only city in that country with more than 600,000 residents. Waco or Abilene would rank sixth or seventh among their biggest population centers. I'm not sure how many parallels can be drawn to a country like ours that has a significantly larger population and a higher population density by about a third.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

---

That's fine. I'm not following you around and misrepresenting your opinions to a bunch of like-minded people -- causing them to do the same in future conversations. If I disagree with you, I'll tell you. But my response to you will be directly related to something you've said on this board. I ask that you return that favor.

---

Has he called you a fascist yet?

---

No, because bear2be2 has not acted the way you have.

It's not that hard, pal. Act like Mussolini, get called Mussolini.

---

Nazi

I just looked and Sweden has had more than twice as many deaths so far (793) as Denmark (233), Norway (108) and Finland (42) combined. And Sweden's deaths per million in population (79) is higher than the combined total of the three others as well (69).

Those numbers are all still pretty modest at this point, but it really comes down to how highly you prioritize life and at what point you start caring about the loss of it. Sweden is clearly putting its citizens at more risk than its geographical neighbors. It's undeniable based on the data.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Predictions weren't 'wrong'.

Social distancing is working .

---

These projections were already assuming social distancing...and they were wrong.

---

The thing I'll be interested to see -- and I think could be the case based on the number of negative tests we're seeing among symptomatic patients -- is if it's possible that the transmission rate isn't really as high as scientists originally believed. That would be good news on an absolute scale because it would significantly lower the number of lives lost to this virus, but it would also make COVID-19 far more deadly on a percentage basis than many believed to be the case.

The more and more we test, the more it's looking like the reported mortality rates are closer to the truth than many first wanted to believe.

bear2be2 said:

---

I just looked and Sweden has had more than twice as many deaths so far (793) as Denmark (233), Norway (108) and Finland (42) combined. And Sweden's deaths per million in population (79) is higher than the combined total of the three others as well (69).

Those numbers are all still pretty modest at this point, but it really comes down to how highly you prioritize life and at what point you start caring about the loss of it. Sweden is clearly putting its citizens at more risk than its geographical neighbors. It's undeniable based on the data.

EDIT (for added context): When Sweden hits 1,000 total deaths, which will happen over the weekend at its current pace, it will have lost 0.1 percent its population. That same percentage would result in more than 330,000 deaths in the United States.

---

How to prioritize life: Live. Don't prevent living. Don't starve children. Don't bankrupt families.

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Voice your opinions as you please, indeed. But understand I will do just the same.

---

That's fine. I'm not following you around and misrepresenting your opinions to a bunch of like-minded people -- causing them to do the same in future conversations. If I disagree with you, I'll tell you. But my response to you will be directly related to something you've said on this board. I ask that you return that favor.

---

Has he called you a fascist yet?

---

No, because bear2be2 has not acted the way you have.

It's not that hard, pal. Act like Mussolini, get called Mussolini.

---

Nazi

---

Gesundheit

Flaming Moderate said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Predictions weren't 'wrong'.

Social distancing is working .

---

The models assumed social distancing through August. That a common circular response, but the models have that baked in.

---

Not really. The Imperial College model assumed general social distancing until mid-June, with an additional two months only for people over 70. It also assumed no lockdowns or shelter-in-place orders that would prevent people from going to work.

Bearitto said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

I just looked and Sweden has had more than twice as many deaths so far (793) as Denmark (233), Norway (108) and Finland (42) combined. And Sweden's deaths per million in population (79) is higher than the combined total of the three others as well (69).

Those numbers are all still pretty modest at this point, but it really comes down to how highly you prioritize life and at what point you start caring about the loss of it. Sweden is clearly putting its citizens at more risk than its geographical neighbors. It's undeniable based on the data.

---

How to prioritize life: Live. Don't prevent living. Don't starve children. Don't bankrupt families.

---

A short period of mutual sacrifice to save a significant number of lives isn't pretending to live. It's the practical step necessary to mitigate a once-in-a-century mass-casualty event.

And children aren't starving and families aren't being bankrupted yet -- and likely won't on any major scale if we navigate this correctly as a nation.

There's no good outcome here, but we have no choice but to put first things first. And solving the medical side of a global pandemic is more important at this stage than an economy that has survived many recessions in the past.

HashTag said:

---

quash said:

---

HashTag said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Kyle said:

---

For every death from Kung Flu, 1,215 people have lost their jobs due to the hysteria.

That's a lot of people without access to health insurance, health care, and at significant risk to lose their homes and struggle to feed their kids.

---

Folks have not lost their jobs due to hysteria, you dolt.

They've lost their jobs due to an act of God that would have very likely killed millions if America hadn't enacted the same strong containment measures that virtually every country in the world has.

Anyone that can look at what's happened in Italy, Spain and New York and still think a burn through/herd immunity plan was a viable option is a science-denying moron, and there is no kinder way I can say that.

---

Yep, if those idiots would've taken the threat seriously when Trump declared a public health emergency and restricted China travel... maybe we would have lower infection numbers.

---

Too bad our president wasn't strong enough to ignore the idiots, eh? Pretty sure all 33 times Trump downplayed the Kung Flu he was doing so to be more downplayier than the Dems.

---

Actually he did you blind bat.... he formed coronavirus task force, has worked with manufacturing companies to make ventilators and masks, declared a national health emergency to open funds from federal, has held 2 hour (or longer) press conferences every damn day to keep the public informed and answering bs questions from reporters that hate him....

You're just being a political jack off. Hell, schiff and pelosi are more concerned with another BS committee to start another BS investigation.

Time for you to grow up squash

---

So easily triggered, maybe you should put me on ignore.

quash said:

---

HashTag said:

---

quash said:

---

HashTag said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Kyle said:

---

For every death from Kung Flu, 1,215 people have lost their jobs due to the hysteria.

That's a lot of people without access to health insurance, health care, and at significant risk to lose their homes and struggle to feed their kids.

---

Folks have not lost their jobs due to hysteria, you dolt.

They've lost their jobs due to an act of God that would have very likely killed millions if America hadn't enacted the same strong containment measures that virtually every country in the world has.

Anyone that can look at what's happened in Italy, Spain and New York and still think a burn through/herd immunity plan was a viable option is a science-denying moron, and there is no kinder way I can say that.

---

Yep, if those idiots would've taken the threat seriously when Trump declared a public health emergency and restricted China travel... maybe we would have lower infection numbers.

---

Too bad our president wasn't strong enough to ignore the idiots, eh? Pretty sure all 33 times Trump downplayed the Kung Flu he was doing so to be more downplayier than the Dems.

---

Actually he did you blind bat.... he formed coronavirus task force, has worked with manufacturing companies to make ventilators and masks, declared a national health emergency to open funds from federal, has held 2 hour (or longer) press conferences every damn day to keep the public informed and answering bs questions from reporters that hate him....

You're just being a political jack off. Hell, schiff and pelosi are more concerned with another BS committee to start another BS investigation.

Time for you to grow up squash

---

So easily triggered, maybe you should put me on ignore.

---

Right back at ya' snowflake

bear2be2 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

tommie said:

---

15,800+ deaths so far. Could have been much higher.

I'd say yes.

---

I'd like to see the post pandemic study that shows the measures taken had actual broad impact and that it would have been "much higher". I'm of the belief we'd have been better served by a hard requirement for mask wearing. As in zero tolerance or you're fined or worse for multiple offenses.

I'm not saying social distancing hasn't had or isn't having any impact, but I think it's proving not to be the panacea it was touted as.

---

I'd like to see a post-mortem study done once this is all over with as well, but I don't really see how anyone can deny at this point that things would have been significantly worse without action.

And I think the best evidence for that is a growing global mortality rate (up to about 6 percent now on confirmed cases) that is significantly higher than average in the countries that were hit hardest by this pandemic. If the mortality rate is at or above 10 percent in those places with preventive action taken, it only stands to reason that it would have been significantly worse without any. And you have to assume that it would have been far more wide spread as well, making it likely that all of the world's major cities would have been hit and had their medical facilities compromised before all was done.

You can also look at our country's fight for medical supplies and imagine how much more dire that would be if more of our major city's were being impacted.

---

We are the country hit hardest by this virus. We have the most confirmed cases, and continue to grow them. The initial models were incredibly overstated, and the haphazard methods we introduced, some not even a week ago, some a month ago, haven't had the impact we would have expected. In fact there's an argument that measures really didn't have the impact because we still had free movement for the most part. I believe a required mask wearing rule would have been much more effective. In fact I think that's what really helped South Korea.

Our mortality rate is likely low because we provide better overall care than most other countries. We don't ration critical care like other countries do, especially when end of life is contemplated. That puts the demand on supplies, but we also didn't triage our care effectively across facilities and regions thus concentrating where pressure was. I think we can better plan for the future without taking some of the absurdly broad measures we instituted this time. Let's learn and get better prepared the next time we face something like this.

Kyle said:

---

My bad. Unemployment numbers higher than expected. For every Kung Flu death, 1,302 people have lost their jobs.

The problem with the "what would have happened if we did not destroy the economy" is a problematic because every single prediction about the pandemic has been wrong by an exponential factor.

And, we still have not reached to total deaths from H1N1. How long were we in quarantine? When did we start? I cannot remember because it has been so long, but you probably know.

---

The projections are wrong because people paid attention and stayed home. That's best vaccine and mitigator

"Likely low". Fact check that one. I e have not done enough testing to know.

Kyle said:

---

No one will respond directly. It will either be ad home, ignore, or ask another question. But here goes:
1. Who would be willing to lose his / her job?
2. Who would be willing to sacrifice Baylor athletics?
3. Who would be willing to lose a spouse's job?
4. Who would be willing to lose their home?
5. Who would be willing to lose $25K? $50K? $100K? $500K? $1M?

We talk in emotional abstracts, but if you knew the current situation shutdown would do 1-5 to you, would you still support the shutdown?

(Please don't be a simpleton and respond with "If your family member or you would die from Kung Flu, would you ....")

---

If it meant the possibility of my parents dying prematurely, vs them living 5 more years then I'd be willing to lose everything. Your last comment in parenthesis is why everyone is doing this.