Foxx Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 2 hours ago, Doc said: ... I would start by cancelling America's debt to China. And then go from there. this is a risky proposition fraught with all kinds of land mines.
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Did you miss where "with" has become "from"? It doesn't matter. If Wuhan virus didn't exist, these people wouldn't be in the hospital or get sick. It's like AIDS doesn't always kill someone. 1
BuffaloHokie13 Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, GG said: It won't quadruple - USA's rate is up to 3.5% already, as NY is closer to 4.25%. Our ability to accommodate is not as important as the underlying health & demographics of the population. That's why Germany is doing better than the suth It's 3.21% as of yesterday's numbers in the US as a whole. Italy's is 12.63%. That's quadruple. Spain's is 9.89. That's triple. 1
123719bwiqrb Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 13 minutes ago, GG said: I'm not arguing today's stats. I'm projecting what will happen if this thing spreads across the country and starts hitting areas that are generally older and not as healthy. 4 minutes ago, GG said: Who the ***** is cheerleading? Dunno.
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 7 minutes ago, Magox said: Well if you were to transport Southern African Americans to New York and they were all huddled up together in the city you'd be closer to being right. But that isn't going to happen. And I will go out on a limb to say that won't end up being the case. Maybe you have a certain particular area such as New Orleans where that could happen but that isn't what you said. You said the rest of the country will be like Italy and Spain. Keep in mind, that 900% lesser infection and death rate on a per capita basis was relative to NY and NJ. In order for it to be like Italy and Spain, then the infection and death rate on a per capita basis for the rest of the country to catch up to those European countries woulld have to increase at about 1700% rate. That's not going to happen GG. The rest of the country is benefiting from the March 13 shutdown. If that didn't happen, most US large cities would be going through NY experience right now. 1
billsfan1959 Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 24 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said: We're now up to 500 Benghazi's happening every single day and rising. I wonder how many investigations there will be into the administration in charge. Are you back to astound us with more brilliant analyses of how the UAE is setting the standard for fighting COVID-19? 1
reddogblitz Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 56 minutes ago, GG said: Think of it more as a cautionary tale, not the exception. One month ago, NY had less than 200 cases. The US isn't as dense as NYC, but if you look at the general health of the rest of the US, if this keeps moving across the country the death rate will be very high because this virus loves heart disease, obesity and diabetes. According to the JDRF, VA, and American Diabetes Association you are at no greater risk to catch Coronavirus if you have diabetes than if you don't. You have a risk for it to be worse if you are not well controlled which they define as an a1c or 9 or 10 which most people would say is not very good control. Are there any statistics on the number of deaths that do have diabetes? And as far as saying they are fat, while only 10% of diabetics are Type I, they are not fat. It is a genetic disease for them.
Buffalo_Gal Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, GG said: It doesn't matter. If Wuhan virus didn't exist, these people wouldn't be in the hospital or get sick. It's like AIDS doesn't always kill someone. You don't know that. Everyone dies eventually. Come on... people with heart disease would never die of a heart attack without COVID-19? People who are 80, 90, would never die without COVID-19? Now if you said, some of these people might not die right now without COVID-19 exacerbating their pre-existing conditions, that may well be true. My (original) point is simply because of the "with" becoming "from" the numbers are cooked. Edited April 8, 2020 by Buffalo_Gal 2 2
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, ScotSHO said: Dunno. You call that cheerleading, dumbass?
123719bwiqrb Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 1 minute ago, GG said: The rest of the country is benefiting from the March 13 shutdown. If that didn't happen, most US large cities would be going through NY experience right now. Not true, just speculation.
Magox Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 Just now, GG said: The rest of the country is benefiting from the March 13 shutdown. If that didn't happen, most US large cities would be going through NY experience right now. Of course it's benefiting. But there are many roadblocks that would have most likely prevented that from happening. I don't see that at all, population density being the main reason. You can say that it happened in small towns in Italy and make your case, but that would be for individual communities. US land mass is 35 times greater than Italy. So the odds that there would have been Italian style outbreak throughout the US is highly unlikely. Maybe if they decided to not shut down at all, but even if they would have began shutting down the same time as NY, it most likely wouldn't have even reached NY and NJ's levels. I don't think so GG.
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 1 minute ago, ScotSHO said: Not true, just speculation. Sure it is. By some miracle the virus stopped at the Delaware River.
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 Just now, Magox said: Of course it's benefiting. But there are many roadblocks that would have most likely prevented that from happening. I don't see that at all, population density being the main reason. You can say that it happened in small towns in Italy and make your case, but that would be for individual communities. US land mass is 35 times greater than Italy. So the odds that there would have been Italian style outbreak throughout the US is highly unlikely. Maybe if they decided to not shut down at all, but even if they would have began shutting down the same time as NY, it most likely wouldn't have even reached NY and NJ's levels. I don't think so GG. People like to use the flu as an example, and the seasonal strains infect 40 - 50 million in the US. Wuhan is equally as contagious, so why wouldn't its spread follow the same trajectory across the country if there were no limits put in place?
Doc Brown Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 10 minutes ago, GG said: The rest of the country is benefiting from the March 13 shutdown. If that didn't happen, most US large cities would be going through NY experience right now. My concern is getting back to a functioning society again when these restrictions are lifted. There's not really a plan for that yet despite the short term optimism of the curve flattening due to social distancing. Edited April 8, 2020 by Doc Brown
123719bwiqrb Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: My concern is getting back to a functioning society again when these restrictions are lifted. There's not really a plan for that yet despite the short term optimism of the curve flattening due to social distancing. People are too worried about the immediate threat. Edited April 8, 2020 by ScotSHO
GG Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: You don't know that. Everyone dies eventually. Come on... people with heart disease would never die of a heart attack without COVID-19? People who are 80, 90, would never die without COVID-19? Now if you said, some of these people might not die right now without COVID-19 exacerbating their pre-existing conditions, that may well be true. My (original) point is simply because of the "with" becoming "from" the numbers are cooked. Italy, Spain & NY are reporting mortality figures that are double the historic trends for these months. If anything, NY has been undercounting Wuhan related deaths. 3 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: My concern is getting back to a functioning society again when these restrictions are lifted. There's not really a plan for that yet despite the short term optimism of the curve flattening due to social distancing. We can go back, but personal habits will absolutely have to change. Forget about hugs and shaking hands for a while. Washing hands whenever you see a faucet.
reddogblitz Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, IDBillzFan said: See DR's links. Start with the SF Chronicle to save you the trouble of dismissing messengers. Move to harvest balloting and the country turns into CA, where you vote means nothing until the people in charge of the state decide it does. I did read that article. The real problem it seems is that the law was changed to allow other people to turn in ballots. Not mail in voting itself. But again, there is no proof here. Just conjecture. I don't see anything about votes being changed or thrown away. If that's happening it's a federal crime and should be fairly easy to catch someone doing it. Even Paul Ryan won't say it's happening or has a big effect. Quote “When you win the absentee ballots and you win the in-person vote, where I come from, you win the election,” Ryan said. “I’m not saying there’s anything nefarious about it, because I just don’t know, but we believed we were up about six seats in California the night of the election, now I think we lost just about every single one of those.” And if Republicans aren't voting, who's fault is that? Why can't they mail in their own ballots? They play hard ball in elections. It's not new. Edited April 8, 2020 by reddogblitz
Magox Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, GG said: People like to use the flu as an example, and the seasonal strains infect 40 - 50 million in the US. Wuhan is equally as contagious, so why wouldn't its spread follow the same trajectory across the country if there were no limits put in place? Right, but that is assuming we do nothing...Which is not what happened anywhere. Some places may have been late to the game (NY) and I don't blame NY because who could have truly made the decision to shut down the entire city off of just a few community infection cases? But, I thought you were making the argument that if the Virus were to spread more in the U.S that it would end up being like Italy and Spain? With the heightened awareness that there now exists, I would put the odds of the rest of the U.S looking like Italy and Spain's mortality, infection and fatality rate per capita at below 1%. 3
Doc Brown Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, GG said: We can go back, but personal habits will absolutely have to change. Forget about hugs and shaking hands for a while. Washing hands whenever you see a faucet. That's the part that scares me as old habits die hard. 2
shoshin Posted April 8, 2020 Posted April 8, 2020 15 minutes ago, Magox said: Of course it's benefiting. But there are many roadblocks that would have most likely prevented that from happening. I don't see that at all, population density being the main reason. You can say that it happened in small towns in Italy and make your case, but that would be for individual communities. US land mass is 35 times greater than Italy. So the odds that there would have been Italian style outbreak throughout the US is highly unlikely. Maybe if they decided to not shut down at all, but even if they would have began shutting down the same time as NY, it most likely wouldn't have even reached NY and NJ's levels. I don't think so GG. Rural America is currently seeing a rise in deaths/1000 at a similar rate as urban areas. It has just taken longer to get there. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/08/us/coronavirus-rural-america-cases.html No part of America is immune to this, except those that change their actions dramatically.
Recommended Posts