the Coronavirus outbreak thread

[77T]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500282]

Originally Posted by Boothroyd

We don’t need them in the workforce during this pandemic. Stay at home as long as you want. When things flatten out then come back to work. This isn’t a personal attack. It’s reality.

I understood your meaning wasn’t cold hearted. If I could be as certain as you are, I might agree.

I just can’t noodle a way to make it workable - but if it helps any, I would be a Boomer who would enjoy your idea working to get the economy fixed.

You see, I make money when you do. I’m fully invested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[superdog]

Originally Posted by joeychitwood

I understood you were speaking to someone else. Just wanted you to know I respect your posts. I've had a couple of people who questioned every post I made, even when a simple Google search on their part would verify the post. It’s frustrating.

I understand. Thank you for clarifying. And saying.

[ronricks]

[QUOTE=Boothroyd;10500287]

Originally Posted by ronricks

I guess you think that no Baby Boomers lead businesses, are CEO's, etc. I question your reality. "Don't need them in workforce"...really?

Being a CEO doesn’t mean you have to be in the office in 2020. You can lead from anywhere these days with technology.
You are trying to split hairs. Stay at home and let younger less susceptible people go to work.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by ronricks

Over the other options which would likely result in an out of control society? Yes I would.

In my opinion panic over civil breakdown over a downturn in the economy is as bad as panic over Covid-19.

The is also the larger question of the damage to civil society if a country voluntary chooses less damage to the economy over 2 or more million lives.

Stay safe.

[djgallo]

Originally Posted by ronricks

Baby Boomers can self quarantine and practice CDC guidelines and not go out unless it is absolutely essential to do such. All my aunts/uncles and parents are Baby Boomers. All of them stayed in the workforce way too long for different reasons. I have a 96 year old grandmother that we don’t let leave the house. I get her groceries and meds and drop them off staying far away from her and immediately leave the house. It is hard but it can be done. I absolutely hear what you are saying but at some point something has to give and that result can’t be what would happen with mass unemployment because that result would be worse than the actual virus. Baby Boomers are just going to have to deal with it just like my generation has had to deal with jobs, unemployment, wages, cost of education and housing etc.

I have a better idea for YOU....just grow up and deal with it.....like the majority of the rest of us are doing.

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

The is also the larger question of the damage to civil society if a country voluntary chooses less damage to the economy over 2 or more million lives.

Stay safe.

As someone said earlier for the at risk group(s)

If I die tomorrow from COVID-19, I will not die next month from heart disease, next year from diabetes or the year after from pneumonia.

So the majority of COVID-19 fatalities inevitably reduce fatality rates of other diseases. Something "the numbers" typically fail to take into consideration...

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by djgallo

I have a better idea for YOU....just grow up and deal with it.....like the majority of the rest of us are doing.

There is no reason I can’t go to work and you can’t stay self quarantined and practice CDC guidelines until the pandemic subsides. That is in fact dealing with it. It isn’t an either or situation. It can absolutely be both without totally wrecking the economy.

[Recondope]

Originally Posted by djgallo

I have a better idea for YOU....just grow up and deal with it.....like the majority of the rest of us are doing.

That is a bit excessive. Every one is entitled to their opinion even if you don't agree with it.

[mountainjogger]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500282]

Originally Posted by Boothroyd

We don’t need them in the workforce during this pandemic. Stay at home as long as you want. When things flatten out then come back to work. This isn’t a personal attack. It’s reality.

An overburdened surge on the healthcare system without the resources we currently lack will kill a lot medical providers.

Second, a fair number of doctors in the US are boomers and older. I posted this stat a week or so ago in this thread. Again, a surge on the healthcare system without the resources to protect providers may result a in large loss of doctors.

It is easy to say let them die. But I have not heard any front line medical providers who are in the trenches risking their life daily say let the chips fall where they may.

[dimag333]

Originally Posted by ronricks

There is no reason I can’t go to work and you can’t stay self quarantined and practice CDC guidelines until the pandemic subsides. That is in fact dealing with it. It isn’t an either or situation. It can absolutely be both without totally wrecking the economy.

I can see your point of view, out of curiosity what is your trade? It’s looking like min June for me to go back regardless if gov says it’s ok before then, I film weddings and large groups and the elderly are a must. We just started pushing our late May dates

steve

[ronricks]

[QUOTE=mountainjogger;10500379]

Originally Posted by ronricks

An overburdened surge on the healthcare system without the resources we currently lack will kill a lot medical providers.

Second, a fair number of doctors in the US are boomers and older. I posted this stat a week or so ago in this thread. Again, a surge on the healthcare system without the resources to protect providers may result a in large loss of doctors.

It is easy to say let them die. But I have not heard any front line medical providers who are in the trenches risking their life daily say let the chips fall where they may.

If you are at risk stay at home. Period.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by gliderpilot

Here is a silver lining. Strictly mathematically speaking, since no figure can be put on human suffering:

If I die tomorrow from COVID-19, I will not die next month from heart disease, next year from diabetes or the year after from pneumonia.

So the majority of COVID-19 fatalities inevitably reduce fatality rates of other diseases. Something "the numbers" typically fail to take into consideration...

And those that die in war, terrorist attacks, car accidents, airplane crashes industrial accidents, and other cuases don't die of diabetes either. I don't think of these things as silver linings. Nor do I view Covid-19 as one either.

[mountainjogger]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500392]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

If you are at risk stay at home. Period.

All medical providers are at risk, particularly from an overtaxed system. Are you suggesting that all medical providers stay home?

[ronricks]

[QUOTE=mountainjogger;10500399]

Originally Posted by ronricks

All medical providers are at risk, particularly from an overtaxed system. Are you suggesting that all medical providers stay home?

At risk people staying at home will help not overwhelm the healthcare system. Do you understand this? I never said for medical providers to stay at home.

[mountainjogger]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500405]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

At risk people staying at home will help not overwhelm the healthcare system. Do you understand this? I never said for medical providers to stay at home.

We are talking at cross purposes. All plans that are credible call for an extended period of at risk populations staying home. I am not disagreeing with that.

And those plans also call for those that are less at risk relaxing some social distancing after the numbers start coming down. The reason for waiting for the numbers to come down is to not overrun the healthcare system.

Non at risk (or more accurately, less risk of dying) people not staying home will still overwhelm the healthcare system. I have heard no epidemiologist who is credible saying otherwise.

Everyone is at risk of catching Covid-19. Without social distancing of everyone, regardless of their age group, our heath system will surge with people needing medical care. You are correct that the odds of those needing medical care recovering increase with their being younger. But a surge on medical care, regardless of how old the patients are, exposes all medical providers working under a non prepared and equipped system to a greater risk of dying. So, more medical providers will die, even some who are not in an at risk group.

And, besides this increased risk to all medical providers, there is a special risk to doctors. One third of US doctors are age 60 and older.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-persp...worse-covid-19

Unless we flatten the curve we will lose a lot of doctors.

Stay safe.

[ronricks]

[QUOTE=mountainjogger;10500449]

Originally Posted by ronricks

We are talking at cross purposes. All plans that are credible call for an extended period of at risk populations staying home. I am not disagreeing with that.

And those plans also call for those that are less at risk relaxing some social distancing after the numbers start coming down. The reason for waiting for the numbers to come down is to not overrun the healthcare system.

Non at risk (or more accurately, less risk of dying) people not staying home will still overwhelm the healthcare system. I have heard no epidemiologist who is credible saying otherwise.

Everyone is at risk of catching Covid-19. Without social distancing of everyone, regardless of their age group, our heath system will surge with people needing medical care. You are correct that the odds of those needing medical care recovering increase with their being younger. But a surge on medical care, regardless of how old the patients are, exposes all medical providers working under a non prepared and equipped system to a greater risk of dying. So, more medical providers will die, even some who are not in an at risk group.

And, beside this increased risk to all medical providers, there is a special risk to doctors. One third of US doctors are age 60 and older.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-persp...worse-covid-19

Unless we flatten the curve we will lose a lot of doctors.

Stay safe.

Here is what Dr Fauci is saying:

If you are not in the at risk categories and you think you may have the virus stay at home. Do not go to urgent care. Do not go to the hospital or ER and absolutely don’t try and waste a test that would be needed by someone in the more at risk categories. My last post on this. If you are at risk stay at home. It helps everyone involved.

[gliderpilot]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

And those that die in war, terrorist attacks, car accidents, airplane crashes industrial accidents, and other cuases don't die of diabetes either. I don't think of these things as silver linings. Nor do I view Covid-19 as one either.

What I am saying is that the actual effective mortality rate of COVID-19 can not be accurately calculated without including its impact on other statistics, and that it would be more "fair" to only include fatalities that would not have occurred otherwise.

And that doesn't even include the long-term impact of an economic meltdown and the unnecessary deaths due to overloaded health care system, inadequate supply of protective equipment, people not following guidelines, etc. which we will likely never know.

Sorry for not being clear enough...

[makak]

Originally Posted by joeychitwood

Ultimately, it may very well be that decisions will need to be made based on the welfare of the many at the expense of the lives of the few. Percentages apply to populations, and that is what public health decisions ultimately pertain to. To an individual, survival is not 98% or whatever the number turns out to be. It is either 100% or 0%. People in the our culture have never faced decisions like those coming. It remains to be seem how they will be made, and how they will be accepted by us. No matter what, it will be painful. There is no happy ending to this pandemic.

I always take note of your posts as I find them incredibly insightful. This particular quote above really resonated with me. Unfortunately I do see these unprecedented tough decisions coming. I hope the right decision are made.

Stay safe

[Boothroyd]

Out. Good luck to all and your families during this extended crisis. Hoping for the best.

[gnuyork]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500457]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Here is what Dr Fauci is saying:

If you are not in the at risk categories and you think you may have the virus stay at home. Do not go to urgent care. Do not go to the hospital or ER and absolutely don’t try and waste a test that would be needed by someone in the more at risk categories. My last post on this. If you are at risk stay at home. It helps everyone involved.

Thing is, everyone is at risk to potentially contract the virus, and worse, spread it. So EVERYONE should stay home for a while.

[statsman]

So, many times I have seen opponents of economic sanctions argue that creating a financial hardship in another country is an attack on innocent lives. The argument is that poverty kills people, as food, shelter and healthcare become scarcities. In the 1990s, opponent’s of sanctions on Iraq claimed that the US was killing 10,000 innocent Iraqis a month with economic sanctions.

I thought that was an exaggeration, but there is probably something to the idea. Yes, we want to slow (and even halt) the spread of this disease. But we can choose tactics that will also damage lives in other ways.

We need to be smart. Our leaders chose a strategy almost three weeks ago. If other strategies look better, if there are smart ways to tweak it, we should be open minded. In my opinion.

This is like a war. The great tactician, General George Patton, once said about strategy planning, “If everybody is thinking the same, then somebody isn’t thinking”.

Sweden is doing something a little different. I think it very much merits watching. Maybe it only works in Sweden, if it works at all. Maybe there are lessons to be shared.

And with respect to a two-tiered system, with more restrictions encouraged (not mandated) for the older and weaker- I’m ok with that the longer this goes on. The weakest need for the healthy to stay strong, to keep the safety net strong for all.

[ronricks]

[QUOTE=gnuyork;10500521]

Originally Posted by ronricks

Thing is, everyone is at risk to potentially contract the virus, and worse, spread it. So EVERYONE should stay home for a while.

Yes we already covered that. The issue is what to do after April 30th and the impact that will have as a whole beyond the virus.

[watchmework]

Anyone else think that come 30 April the Social Distancing guidelines will be extended at least another two weeks? Could of sworn the modeling Dr. Birx presented today was put forward as what the scenario could be if we were following through with social distancing until the end of May. That and on top of the comment that "the country will be well on our way to normal life by 1 June" makes me scratch my head about the gap...certainly we will have to do some form of social distancing for the foreseeable future but I'm hoping that come the beginning of May we will be able to start easing back into a somewhat normal life.

[Fleetlord]

That's because the "flu" deaths reported are probably bogus...melted together with other deaths...to push flu vaccines.

Now the flu does kill people and I always get a flu shot because the flu sucks, but those numbers are pretty sketchy...

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/lawren...b_4661442.html

"According to the National Vital Statistics System in the U.S., for example, annual flu deaths in 2010 amounted to just 500 per year" -

COVID-19 has more than likely exposed the fraud of the "flu" death because what you are seeing happening right now is what the world would really be like if there were that many cases of infection and subsequent deaths. Flooded hospitals and lots of daily obituaries.

Oddly enough the people who question Covid-19 take these sketchy flu numbers as gospel and thus have become habituated to their huge numbers...so when the real mccoy is here and actually causing large scale carnage, it's not believed or it's marginalized in comparison to events that don't happen as people think they do.

It's all come home to roost now.

[77T]

Originally Posted by watchmework

Anyone else think that come 30 April the Social Distancing guidelines will be extended at least another two weeks? Could of sworn the modeling Dr. Birx presented today was put forward as what the scenario could be if we were following through with social distancing until the end of May. That and on top of the comment that "the country will be well on our way to normal life by 1 June" makes me scratch my head about the gap...certainly we will have to do some form of social distancing for the foreseeable future but I'm hoping that come the beginning of May we will be able to start easing back into a somewhat normal life.

I noticed the same as you did - looks like Memorial Day before anything like “normal life” will return.

But it’s always possible that certain population segments would be “stay at home”. By mid-April you’ll hear or see concerns expressed about the most vulnerable - and the narrative may be bifurcation of the population.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Fleetlord]

[QUOTE=ronricks;10500282]

Originally Posted by Boothroyd

We don’t need them in the workforce during this pandemic. Stay at home as long as you want. When things flatten out then come back to work. This isn’t a personal attack. It’s reality.

This is a bit of reality on the economic side.


Business Failure Rates and Startup Statistics for 2019
First year: 21.5%
Second year: 30%
Fifth year: 50%
10th year: 70%

https://www.national.biz/2019-small-...tics-industry/

Small businesses we are fretting over and willing to trade lives over are not that viable long term anyway. Most are as unhealthy as people who are obese, old...etc. Why shouldn't we just write those off too?

[superdog]

[QUOTE=Fleetlord;10500632]

Originally Posted by ronricks

This is a bit of reality on the economic side.


Business Failure Rates and Startup Statistics for 2019
First year: 21.5%
Second year: 30%
Fifth year: 50%
10th year: 70%

https://www.national.biz/2019-small-...tics-industry/

Small businesses we are fretting over and willing to trade lives over are not that viable long term anyway. Most are as unhealthy as people who are obese, old...etc. Why shouldn't we just write those off too?

[Fleetlord]

[QUOTE=superdog;10500634]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

It's just an alternate viewpoint that has come up in various conversations I've had.

Clearly unpopular, but so are many viewpoints surrounding this..

[Dawg2]

Originally Posted by statsman

I have a question for you to consider. I really don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other.

Sweden is not shutting down like most developed countries. They are encouraging hygiene and social distancing, but not mandating it. They have a Covid-19 problem (180 deaths in a population of ten million) but it is not as bad as some.

The US just added 20k new cases and over 500 deaths each of the last couple of days.

Question- if the US doesn’t see a significant improvement, should we imitate Sweden’s policy?

No. They are playing with fire. Just wait and see...

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[Brenngun]

Originally Posted by ronricks

There is no reason I can’t go to work and you can’t stay self quarantined and practice CDC guidelines until the pandemic subsides. That is in fact dealing with it. It isn’t an either or situation. It can absolutely be both without totally wrecking the economy.

Since as you said earlier technology does allow working from home much easier these days. Would allowing able bodied people to go out to work but only if they can't work from home be acceptable to you?