[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
2nd wave is here
19,233 Views |
237 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Canada2017
Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
BTW, forgot to ask: will you and your family be taking the vaccine?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I would take it today if they would give it to me.
br53 said:
I would take it today if they would give it to me.
As I projected months ago......another excellent vaccine has been announced today .
Unfortunately it doesn't restore those already dead or the thousands more who will die in the next few weeks.
Dead for the sake of an economy supplying a yuppie's mortgage payment .
The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Point is ...we treat our tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is much more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
Canada2017 said:Point is ...we treat are tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is more more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
Fighting about who has sacrificed what for COVID is stupid. It's irrelevant to what is best for society as a whole.
Many of all beliefs have sacrificed.
Is a non-essential business one that is majority- or wholly-owned by someone with a net worth of $250 million or more?
As a fellow landlord , 2017 went way beyond what is expected . Props to him.Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Mothra....I side with Canada on this one. He's a business man. He treated his tenants better than most would. As far Americans not having a pot to piss in, that is not his fault. I don't know how old you are, but having money in the bank to weather the storm is so, so prudent. Maybe, americans should live within their means. No big house payments in kick ass neighborhoods and maybe no care note. Buy what you can afford in cash.Canada2017 said:Point is ...we treat are tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is much more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
What's best for society as a whole is selective shutdowns where needed until these various vaccines can be distributed .AZ_Bear said:Canada2017 said:Point is ...we treat are tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is more more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
Fighting about who has sacrificed what for COVID is stupid. It's irrelevant to what is best for society as a whole.
Many of all beliefs have sacrificed.
I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Not to mention that part of the strategy with shutdowns all along has been to delay the serious effects long enough to have a vaccine. If anything, we now have two vaccine trials with incredible effectiveness in the studies, so shutdowns are an even clearer choice in the face of the massive surge we're seeing right now.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
This is probably the most sensible thing you've said.
I trust then you have not reported to work in the past couple of weeks.RebelT said:Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
Carlos Safety said:I trust then you have not reported to work in the past couple of weeks.RebelT said:Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
He must be working because he's spending a lot of money on takeout, and complaining about people not wearing masks outside the restaurant when he's getting food from inside a restaurant that is full of people not wearing masks.
When did they open restaurants?AZ_Bear said:Carlos Safety said:I trust then you have not reported to work in the past couple of weeks.RebelT said:Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
He must be working because he's spending a lot of money on takeout, and complaining about people not wearing masks outside the restaurant when he's getting food from inside a restaurant that is full of people not wearing masks.
AZ_Bear said:Carlos Safety said:I trust then you have not reported to work in the past couple of weeks.RebelT said:Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
He must be working because he's spending a lot of money on takeout, and complaining about people not wearing masks outside the restaurant when he's getting food from inside a restaurant that is full of people not wearing masks.
Your comment was so ****ing stupid the first time I read it that I ignored it, and it's even more stupid this time around.
Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
br53 said:When did they open restaurants?AZ_Bear said:Carlos Safety said:I trust then you have not reported to work in the past couple of weeks.RebelT said:Sam Lowry said:I said I supported it in the spring. I also said the severity of lockdowns would depend on the success of the other elements of our strategy. Minimal suppression measures like social distancing and quarantine of the sick and their families could last for the duration. Shutdowns can't roll ad infinitum because of high cost and diminishing returns. Assuming good leadership, at some point the healthcare system will be as prepared as it can be and we'll have to sink or swim with the results.Mothra said:Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but aren't you suggesting rolling shut downs ad infinitum? Right now you've said you would support a 5-month shut down of all non-essential businesses.Sam Lowry said:I'm not familiar with that poll. The one I saw was taken in May, but it didn't mention six months or any specific time period.Mothra said:You said a 5-month shutdown is all that would be needed. You never said or suggested this would be a rolling shutdown going on ad infinitum. How long do you want to continue to shut down the economy? And again, how is it feasible? That's a question you can't seem to answer.Sam Lowry said:I've never suggested it was a cure to the disease. My point in posting was to show that it never claimed to be.Mothra said:Thanks. And you believe this is an accurate model - as compared to others - because it has accurately predicted the numbers?Sam Lowry said:The Imperial College model projected a couple of hundred thousand to a couple of million deaths in two years. It was the model on which the Trump administration supposedly based its policy. It was widely ridiculed at the time, but the numbers are on track to be accurate.Mothra said:
I've shares it at least 3 times on various threads and will look for the link again.
Where's that accurate model you told us about? And why's it accurate?
The point is that a second surge was always expected (see Figure 3 in the IC report). A second surge cannot be evidence against the accuracy of a model when the model itself predicted it.
I see where you are getting your 5 month number, although the model describes suppression as "a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members...supplemented by school and university closures." It doesn't really talk about closure of businesses. Are we to assume that "social distancing of the entire population" includes a lockdown of all non-essential businesses?
Other interesting things to note from the study are the fact that the model recognizes that many of these measures may not be feasible. And of course, while a complete shut down would obviously be optimal, it fails to describe how we would do that, or whether it is in fact feasible. And that of course has always been the issue.
Also interesting to note is that it says the country will need "at least" a 5-month lockdown to suppress the virus. It suggests the lockdowns would have to continue over time, with the easing of lockdowns and then tightening back up when there is a surge. I guess this is recommended ad infinitum until an effective vaccine is put in place. So shutting down is something we would have to continue indefinitely during flareups. So your 5 month number is not a cure to the disease, as you've suggested. It's a stop gap measure until the next surge.
In short, it really sounds good on paper, if it were a workable solution. The evidence I've sought, which I haven't seen yet, is how the suggested months long lockdowns ad infinitum are workable.
The IC definition doesn't include closing all non-essential businesses. That was an additional measure that helped Europe reduce the virus reproduction rate in a couple of months. Most Americans supported our own shutdowns and believed they should have continued longer.
As for the poll you mentioned, let's put it in context, shall we? It was taken in April. The majority of Americans at that time said they favored the shutdown for approximately one month beyond the date of the poll - which would have been until mid-May. Only one-third of respondents said they could obey such restrictions for an additional six months.
Obviously we can't shut down forever. The point is to minimize loss of life by increasing health care capacity, testing, contact tracing, etc. It was never to avoid a second wave completely. Other parts of the world are further into the pandemic, but most of them are in a better position overall.
Europe is worse off than us right now with new cases, though I agree we are worse overall. There are probably many reasons for that. It seems the more secluded areas have done better than us.
Unlike the shutdowns in the spring, there is at least a light at the end of the tunnel...and we know it's not a train.
He must be working because he's spending a lot of money on takeout, and complaining about people not wearing masks outside the restaurant when he's getting food from inside a restaurant that is full of people not wearing masks.
Maybe a bad assumption from the way he told the story that touched a hot button. Because restaurants are open in Arizona (and Texas) , it sounded like people were waiting for their tables outside a restaurant he was picking up carry out from.
I can't tell you how often I hear the same people complaining about mask wearing who are eating in restaurants full of people without masks. It's ridiculous.
Educate me
Suspect its much of this has to do with the numerous Indian reservations in the state .Forest Bueller_bf said:Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
During the 1918 pandemic native Americans took heavy casualties.
We can all lament the lack of savings in America from our cushy perches. Reality is 56% of the workforce is hourly making $20 or less an hour. To add an additional perspective, state unemployment + the $600 Federal add on created a weekly wage that exceeded the earnings of 50%+ of American families.J.R. said:Mothra....I side with Canada on this one. He's a business man. He treated his tenants better than most would. As far Americans not having a pot to piss in, that is not his fault. I don't know how old you are, but having money in the bank to weather the storm is so, so prudent. Maybe, americans should live within their means. No big house payments in kick ass neighborhoods and maybe no care note. Buy what you can afford in cash.Canada2017 said:Point is ...we treat are tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is much more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
It's those people that will take the biggest hits. Not the people paying them.
Fargo voted down a mask mandate: https://www.kvrr.com/2020/10/05/push-for-mask-mandate-in-fargo-fails/Forest Bueller_bf said:Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
Freedom to make sure more people would die.
Couldn't enforce such a mandate on the people who most likely need it most.....Indians.J.B.Katz said:Fargo voted down a mask mandate: https://www.kvrr.com/2020/10/05/push-for-mask-mandate-in-fargo-fails/Forest Bueller_bf said:Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
Freedom to make sure more people would die.
Make em stay on the reservation and make the National Guard watch over them, what could possibly go wrong that always worked well in the past.Canada2017 said:Couldn't enforce such a mandate on the people who most likely need it most.....Indians.J.B.Katz said:Fargo voted down a mask mandate: https://www.kvrr.com/2020/10/05/push-for-mask-mandate-in-fargo-fails/Forest Bueller_bf said:Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
Freedom to make sure more people would die.
The article I took this from blamed it on ND having the lowest mask wearing percentage in the nation.Canada2017 said:Suspect its much of this has to do with the numerous Indian reservations in the state .Forest Bueller_bf said:Quote:
North Dakota is waaaayyy beyond just merely "hit hard". It ranks as the #1 hotspot for #COVID19 mortality rate ***in entire world***. South Dakota, Cook County (Chicago), Wisconsin and Montana not far behind. (HT Dr. Eric Ding
@greg_travis
and
@VanGennepD
)
Highest mortality rate in the world right now is ND.
During the 1918 pandemic native Americans took heavy casualties.
But, I bet you are right. Any poor rural area will do badly if hit hard.
I remember when my dad had a stroke, I got a call from the hospital in Waco, dad drove himself over 20 miles to get there, he got lucky. Doc's and easily accessible care around every corner in poor unincorporated rural areas isn't the reality.
ATL Bear said:We can all lament the lack of savings in America from our cushy perches. Reality is 56% of the workforce is hourly making $20 or less an hour. To add an additional perspective, state unemployment + the $600 Federal add on created a weekly wage that exceeded the earnings of 50%+ of American families.J.R. said:Mothra....I side with Canada on this one. He's a business man. He treated his tenants better than most would. As far Americans not having a pot to piss in, that is not his fault. I don't know how old you are, but having money in the bank to weather the storm is so, so prudent. Maybe, americans should live within their means. No big house payments in kick ass neighborhoods and maybe no care note. Buy what you can afford in cash.Canada2017 said:Point is ...we treat are tenants very well. Including giving some of them thousands of dollars .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:The tenants initiated the moveouts .The lease contracts were not honored,Mothra said:[sarcasm]Gave them their deposits back? Wow! What a compassionate guy you are.[/sarcasm]Canada2017 said:We have had 3 tenants lose their jobs so far. Two left on their own and one the lease was over and sold the house .ATL Bear said:How many tenants are you going to evict when they can't pay rent? How much government support are you going to ask for to sustain your properties or recover lost rent?Canada2017 said:Mothra said:Canada2017 said:Some will shut down..the ones that are debt loaded.Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has already cost me at least $ 200,000 one way or another .Mothra said:Canada2017 said:It has affected my tenants as well.J.R. said:I'm not saying a lockdown is the answer, hell I'm not smart enough to know the answer. It is a real tricky balance between virus mitigation and not completely tanking the economy. We all can't afford not to have income to support our families and ourselves. My businesses have suffered greatly during the last 8 months. One of my businesses is multifamily real estate. Depending on the property, I have many, many tenants that work retail, and or the service industry which have been decimated. We have been working with them on rents, ect., but that can't continue much longer. Unfortunately , my lenders expect their money. It's a hell of a pickle! It all just sucks.Mothra said:J.R. said:
For all you deniers, I sure hope people around you don't start dying. i'v lost 4 and counting. One of my BU fraternity brothers is currently in the hospital and going down fast in Houston. It's real, folks. Everybody, can do what they want, but I chose to do my part based on the best science we have.
No on this thread has suggested anything other than reasonable proposals. But lockdowns for 90 days is not the answer and will lead to more deaths and misery. Some of us need to pay our mortgage and health insurance. As the father of a special. Reds child, I can't afford to be out of work.
I have friends who have lost parents and grandparents and a dad who lost his best friend. It's the reason we are not spending thanksgiving with him. Isolation and lockdowns forever however are not the answer.
But money can be replaced...lives cannot .
See this is my problem with your position. You'll be fine financially regardless. It's not the sacrifice for you it is for others.
Stay in your basement if you want. Don't ask the rest of us to have our families ruined.
But again, we are talking only 3 months .
We are fortunate the scientific community is going to save us from our own shortsightedness .
3 months of financial suffering or death for additional thousands ?
Good grief you are an attorney and cant ride out 3 months ?
My legal leg breaker could ride out 3 years and still order top shelf .
So just three months? How does that work exactly. My law firm and all their clients' businesses shut down for three months and then magically restart where we left off? You think that's how this will work?
Come on man. You're smarter than that. Millions of businesses will go under and I won't have a job in 90 days.
Other businesses with cash reserves will fill in their niche very quickly......and make even bigger profits.
That's how it always works. Those that manage their debt load usually get ahead in the long run . Those that can't.....lose eventually .
Sorry guy...but there are always other jobs.
Choices.
But dying is a one way street....no overs.
You might want to research how many people died during the depression because that's what your scenario would lead to.
As flippant as you've accused me of being, you've been awfully flippant about other people's financial ruin. It's easy to be flippant when you've got a cash reserve. As you well know, most Americans are not so lucky.
You're scenario is unworkable and absurd. Thank god no reasonable politician would allow such authoritarian policy here.
I choose not to live my life in fear.
You have expressed your fear of unemployment and it's priority over peoples lives since the beginning of this pandemic .
As the death count reaches a quarter of a million , nothing has changed. Your job is far more important to you than peoples lives .
And although many people feel the same ....it should be obvious to everyone.....
jobs can be replaced but dead.....is DEAD.
We gave all of them their deposits back in full.
One lady we reduced her rent by 30% the last 3 months of her lease, returned her deposit in full, and gave her $ 2000 dollars to help move.
We have not taken a penny in government assistance nor asked for it .
For the record I expect the rental situation in northern Colorado to get much worse over the next year.
40% due to covid and 60% due to the Dems inevitable assault against the energy industry .
Deposits involved were 2 thousand dollars each.
We were under no obligation to return said deposits and had to incur the overhead costs associated with the vacancy of large, single family houses. We did so willingly, and even gave one tenant an additional 2000 dollars ( unasked ) to help . Have no doubt we will be doing more of the same in the coming weeks.
BTW, as I read your childish/clueless comments ......it is becoming more difficult for me to believe you are a fully licensed, practicing attorney.
Though if in fact you are....it's certainly obvious why you are so concerned about losing your job .
Of course the tenants initiated the move outs. That's what happens when you lose your job and can no longer pay for your home/apartment.
Here's a news flash: most Americans are concerned with losing their jobs. We don't all have a huge savings to rely on for basic necessities.
I couldn't care less what a selfish dolt and coward such as yourself believes about me personally. I find your selfish attitude revolting and repugnant. Hide in your basement.
Which is much more than you have done for ANYONE... hypocritical shmuck .
Hell, you want people to DIE just because you were too shortsighted to save 6 months worth of funds.
As an ATTORNEY no less , you couldn't get out of debt.
Well yuppie ........that is 100% on you .
All true, however people make choices .
My best mechanic makes close to 100k per year but lives with his parents.
40 years old with lots of toys ...all on credit. One kid in California , one kid in Colorado and never stays at one job longer than a 18 months .
Know professionals making $ 300,000-$ 500,000 a year who can't pay their taxes.
And we all know people who just 'have' to vacation in Cancun every year.........and put it all on their credit cards.