This isn’t Spanish flu though. I don’t remember all the details of that off the top of my head, but on thing that changed the situation there was that there was much less international travel back then so it took much longer to spread. Right now the coronavirus is everywhere.
Most people already have no symptoms anyway.
Let’s hope so.
Like I said, I don’t have a comprehensive plan to propose, but something more limited than what we have in place while isolating those at high risk would be better. For both the medical system and the economy.
In Toronto you can now get a fine up to $5000 for standing less than 2 metres from another person in public. Just think about this for a second.
Asymptomatic rates, death rates, hospitalization rates, unemployment rates, businesses closing permanently, etc.
I said “maybe not a concrete plan”. Of course the plan will change depending on many factors, but I’m not aware of any planning at all.
I don’t even know what a 401k is, and fuck the elite. I’m worried about regular people.
Are you a communist?
No, but what the hell does this have to do with anything? Poor people are the ones who suffer the most when the economy goes down.
I’m glad you’re thinking. I’m already in a better financial position than I was a month ago. I will come out of this pandemic a step ahead of where I would have been otherwise.
Under what system? Historically the poor did quite well when the economy suffers via revolutions, upheavals, or coups. In the modern world the privileged use “the law” - ie government force to keep the poor under their thumb.
C’mon man! I’m just trying to spur thought, not to dictate.
You ever been pulled over for passing a tractor in a no passing zone and the officer’s response was “I’m just doing my job”? $50k a year doesn’t give you a whole lot of political power - especially when your top priority is to feed your family.
This has no effect on what I said though. Wouldn’t you agree that a significant response earlier might have decreased the need for what we are doing now? But we didn’t want to change because it would hurt the economy. And now we are forced to change which hurts the economy. And are maybe shut down even longer.
I’m just saying in our rush to get back to normal for the sake of the economy we need to carefully weigh that and make sure we aren’t making the same mistake twice. We have no guarantee that a quick open is better the economy long term.
If you think these things aren’t being discussed I can assure you you’re wrong. But what’s the point of talking about all the possible plans they have? How would it help us if those constantly have to change? It would just add fear and uncertainty. Two things we don’t need more of.
They suffer in both scenarios. That 2.2 trillion stimulus package wasn’t created with the poor in mind. Most big legislation gives just enough crumbs to keep the poor from raising too big of a stink.
The context was given, though. In one city, in one day, 562 people died of a novel virus for which the city is already quarantined and under lawful orders to stay at home, and we’re not at the peak yet. I don’t know that there’s a way to make that sound not bad. I suppose the media could make a more concerted effort to not increase panic (imagine? lol), but I do think there are enough people in positions of power or influence saying that this isn’t a big deal to necessitate some sense of urgency.
As a side note, you know I respect you, and I’m not trying to incense you or suggest that you don’t care about this, I get where you’re coming from. Just figured I’d add my own context, as I can get fired up about stuff and there’s been far too much flaming in these threads anyway.
Well, if we assume that none of those people would have died if they’d not had Coronavirus, I think that’s about .0066% of NYC. I think the average size of a U.S. city or town is a bit over 20,000(we’ll use 25,000). What is .0066% of 25,000? 1.65
Complaining about the media in things like this is fine but it’s also important to realize what they want to do. Coronavirus or not the goal in an online world is to get someone to click on an article. We can hope they won’t make clickbait headlines, but that is going against something that they know works.
It’s not a left, right, or center thing. People want you to consume their articles and the best way to do that is to pique your interest. I’m not saying it’s good merely expected. Long after this shit it will be something else getting clickbait headlines. This is just currently what most people want to read about.
I’d say yes, that is significant, but no one’s really concerned with heart disease. They should be, but they’re not. But I also don’t think at all that Flap’s fact is not significant.
They both should be taken seriously, but heart disease mostly affects those who don’t take of themselves, and corona can kill people who are young, healthy, etc. and heart diseases aren’t contagious.
EDIT: Ah shoot, my phone wasn’t showing me all the following posts already discussing this. I still really stand by the bolded part though.
Good stuff. And Coronavirus can potentially make everything else even more deadly. In a way we can’t possibly quantify. That’s why the death rate of Coronavirus isn’t the most important aspect of it. It has the potential to be far “deadlier” based on the decrease of having resources to take care of all the other shit people are in the hospital for.
You fail to understand that most, if not all, are dying in hospitals. You know that people work there and they have to work harder than you ever have or will trying to save them? They are also putting their own health and lives at a greater risk than you ever have or will. Not to mention the negative impact this has on people who need hospitalization for things other than covid.
Also, there are even more people in the hospital than just those who have died. There are even more people who are hospitalized and recovering. Again, they drain resources for other patients and put a lot of stress on hospital employees. A stress you have never and will never experience. But hey, as long as things look good from the couch, it must look good everywhere.
I wasn’t comparing heart disease to coroavirus. I was only using it as an example because I already knew the deaths per minute and to illustrate how contextualizing data matters.
Yes, corona can kill anyone, but, again, the context of the data is relevant:
