This Corona Virus Mania is Just Too Much, We All Need to Chill!
- Thread starter ddk
- Start date
- Status
Which isn't true, people died from other pandemics or nations were never shut down this way because of one?
david
I don't think so. I would be very surprised if the world isn't faced with a similar problem from a new agent within the next 5-10 years. Depending on how the current crisis ends (if it does), the next one should definitively answer that question.
NOT looking forward to this...
Not eating take out/delivery? Buy gift cards from places you like. Actions are worth a lot more than bickering.
There has not been a pandemic previously that had the same potential for widespread mortality as this one, except perhaps the "Black Death". Note that that one was so bad that the historical record is incomplete (because the ones who would have kept that record died); based on what has been assembled, though, it appears that nations essentially "shut down" for over a century.
In the Spanish Flu pandemic, social distancing and other measures similar to what is being done now are widely credited with stopping it. And the Spanish Flu had a lower contagion rate and lower death rate from the virus itself (most of the deaths were from bacterial superinfection, which can be successfully treated today)
No, not at all, Al.
I am perplexed by how disparate the opinions about this virus, and the various responses to it, have become. I am perplexed that opinions about POTUS are so divided. Your question above makes the assumption that the US Government's response is tepid. I do not think it has been tepic. I guess that I am perplexed that we can have such a different opinion about that. But, that's fine.
Your posting this link is simply more evidence of the disparate opinions that are out there. I thank you for posting it to support my comments, as I thanked Tasos for supporting my comments with his WTH remark. I guess I am further perplexed by your question in this post and by your quick dismissal of David's comments about the article you posted.
Ifr you are perplexed about the latter, then you are in fact perplexed about the criticism of tepid response. Thank you for confirming, Peter.
Most of the disparate "opinions" are due to a well-known psychological phenomenon called "cognitive dissonance". If you don't know what that is, look it up. And it hard to see how our federal government's response has been anything but tepid; just compare it to actions many individual states have taken
What exactly has the federal government done other than employ Fauci and send a couple ships? They delayed in taking this seriously. They messed up the initial testing. After that it took forever for there to be widespread testing. Even now it is hard to get a test. They didn’t take the lead roll in procuring PPE and instead forced the states to battle it out among themselves. Finally, they should have strongly recommend that all states shut down so that the end would come sooner. Thank god for the great governors who have stepped forward for their states. Tons of them.
Last edited:
So basically there have been other ones killing hundreds of thousand and even millions but no government shutdowns on basis of "experts" and their flawed models! All I'm saying is I have questions and doubts about what's you and some others accept as indisputable.
david
Yes, thank God. While not perfect, our governor in Massachusetts has been among the best.
Just for accuracy, the models are not flawed. The assumptions used were unreliable because the data is still emerging. When Trump came out and said the models predict 100-240k deaths Fauci was very quick to let people know that the projections are only as good as the assumptions and they were subject to change based on behavior. As the data has emerged, the assumptions have been refined. Sure, the modelers could have told everyone they wouldn’t show results until the summer but I am sure people wanted numbers. If there was no social distancing the deaths would have been well in excess of 100-240k.
Finally, can you show me where a governor made a decision to close his state based on a model? It may have happened but I have not seen it.
People who form a strong opinion one way or another and who hold on to it refusing to allow it shift at all and then frame all experiences to confirm the original opinion... then go on to spend much of their lives trying to convince all others that they are right and that the others are wrong. Hmmmm sounds strangely familiar... perhaps a bit like audiophiles
.I agree this situation is completely fluid Steve and people who aren’t willing to learn and adapt and respond to it as things shift aren’t helping any of us at all. Nobody should be afraid to say that they didn’t know enough to make the correct call early on. Changing views and perspectives can be a good part of learning and growing.
Last edited:
If I were trying to attract the members of WBF to vote for a resolution summarizing an attempt at a consensus view -- trying to maximize the number of "Yea" votes -- I would propose the following:
Resolved:
1) Initially POTUS misunderstood the medical threat of the virus and wrongly downplayed and dismissed it.
2) The initial federal response to the virus was slow and erratic because of, among other reasons, legacy bureaucratic rules at government health agencies regarding testing protocols and approval procedures, inadequate supplies of personal protective equipment and virus tests, inaccurate and inconsistent pronouncements by the W.H.O., and 1) above.
3) Since the slow and halting start in 1) and 2) POTUS has understood and accepted the magnitude of the virus problem, and has empowered medical, health, economic and financial members of the administration to energize significant and impressive government and private sector responses to the pandemic.
* * *
Legislation is not perfect. A good piece of legislation leaves everybody who voted for it somewhat dissatisfied. The perfect is not allowed to be the enemy of the good.
Could this compromise resolution attract majority WBF support?
Resolved:
1) Initially POTUS misunderstood the medical threat of the virus and wrongly downplayed and dismissed it.
2) The initial federal response to the virus was slow and erratic because of, among other reasons, legacy bureaucratic rules at government health agencies regarding testing protocols and approval procedures, inadequate supplies of personal protective equipment and virus tests, inaccurate and inconsistent pronouncements by the W.H.O., and 1) above.
3) Since the slow and halting start in 1) and 2) POTUS has understood and accepted the magnitude of the virus problem, and has empowered medical, health, economic and financial members of the administration to energize significant and impressive government and private sector responses to the pandemic.
* * *
Legislation is not perfect. A good piece of legislation leaves everybody who voted for it somewhat dissatisfied. The perfect is not allowed to be the enemy of the good.
Could this compromise resolution attract majority WBF support?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
