COVID-19 Megathread II (Please limit all COVID discussion to this thread)

[adsfan]

I'm actually just as intrested in economic data as I am covid data. I want to know if people are actually going to turn out and go to places that are packed full with no restrictions.

I have relatives in Florida and Arizona. There is no way that I am going to either one of those states in the next few months!

 

[adsfan]

Those in the younger age brackets probably will but I think those 40+ will be more cautious.

Read my edit for post #897.

 

[Armourboy]

Read my edit for post #897.

Mobile doesn't show post numbers.

 

[adsfan]

Mobile doesn't show post numbers.

Sorry! A lot of younger people are getting sick now that some schools are back in session.

Edit: I found the story. She was 47 and taught German at the same high school near Green Bay for 16 years. The positivity rate in WI on 9/17/20 was 17.8%, the highest ever and over 2034 new cases in one day, also a record for Wisconsin. The Brown County (Green Bay area) positivity rate was 24.4%! Of the record cases, 443 were in the 10 - 19 age group, 574 cases in 20 - 29, the highest.

The UW football team has 42 players and staff infected with COVID-19.

 

[Armourboy]

Sorry! A lot of younger people are getting sick now that some schools are back in session.

Edit: I found the story. She was 47 and taught German at the same high school near Green Bay for 16 years. The positivity rate in WI on 9/17/20 was 17.8%, the highest ever and over 2034 new cases in one day, also a record for Wisconsin. The Brown County (Green Bay area) positivity rate was 24.4%! Of the record cases, 443 were in the 10 - 19 age group, 574 cases in 20 - 29, the highest.

The UW football team has 42 players and staff infected with COVID-19.

Ok? All I said is that young people were more likely to go out to events over those in their 40's. It had nothing to do with who will get it.

Age doesn't have anything to do with with who will get it, but it does make a big difference in who will die from it.

 

[FossilFndr]

I may try the single malt scotch version of the test if wine is inconclusive

 

[Armourboy]

View attachment 369212

I may try the single malt scotch version of the test if wine is inconclusive

I'd just start there or some bourbon.

 

[triggrman]

I just want to say again. I do think COVID is real, dangerous and I for sure don’t want it. I just don’t think closing select business down is fair unless you’re prepared to help bail them out.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I just want to say again. I do think COVID is real, dangerous and I for sure don’t want it. I just don’t think closing select business down is fair unless you’re prepared to help bail them out.

On the otherhand, it can become "fair" to close select businesses down and not bail them out IF you determine they have knowingly contravened any mandated protective measures and put their employees and clientele at risk. Just like if a business isn't maintaining other public health standards for cleanliness or safety they could be shut down. Case by case as determined by health inspectors.

 

[Armourboy]

On the otherhand, it can become "fair" to close select businesses down and not bail them out IF you determine they have knowingly contravened any mandated protective measures and put their employees and clientele at risk. Just like if a business isn't maintaining other public health standards for cleanliness or safety they could be shut down. Case by case as determined by health inspectors.

That's not what happened though. From the start they singled out certain types of businesses and then those businesses tried to fight them because they weren't being treated equally.

Frankly the City of Nashville should have been forced to pay every owner and employee during that time. If you have the authority to shut them down then you should have the responsibility of maintaining them so they are able to reopen afterwards.

That is nor was it ever going to happen because Cooper didn't give a damn and I'm still not convinced there wasn't some ulterior motive behind that.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

That's not what happened though. From the start they singled out certain types of businesses and then those businesses tried to fight them because they weren't being treated equally.

Frankly the City of Nashville should have been forced to pay every owner and employee during that time. If you have the authority to shut them down then you should have the responsibility of maintaining them so they are able to reopen afterwards.

That is nor was it ever going to happen because Cooper didn't give a damn and I'm still not convinced there wasn't some ulterior motive behind that.

I didn't say it's what happened. I said that would be a fair way for it to happen. Now that everything is open again.

It doesn't mean there couldn't have been certain types of businesses (e.g. bars) which public health could have determined are unsafe to operate in a given pandemic phase, period, without any additional regulations. Which is what happened. And could happen again.

And the City of Nashville shouldn't have to pay them. It should be a federal program.

 

[Armourboy]

I didn't say it's what happened. I said that would be a fair way for it to happen. Now that everything is open again.

It doesn't mean there couldn't have been certain types of businesses (e.g. bars) which public health could have determined are unsafe to operate in a given pandemic phase, period, without any additional regulations. Which is what happened. And could happen again.

And the City of Nashville shouldn't have to pay them. It should be a federal program.

The Feds didn't shut them down, so why should the Federal Government pay for it? If you are going to use local authority to shut it down then you should have local funds pay for it. Why should someone in Idaho, Texas, Michigan, or the rest of Tennessee pay for something the City of Nashville did on its own?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

The Feds didn't shut them down, so why should the Federal Government pay for it? If you are going to use local authority to shut it down then you should have local funds pay for it. Why should someone in Idaho, Texas, Michigan, or the rest of Tennessee pay for something the City of Nashville did on its own?

The City of Nashville doesn't do it on its own. It's a GLOBAL pandemic. Shutdowns aren't an arbitrary decision they make randomly. They may become the local arm of applying protocols they developed from input at state and national levels, but the only level which has the capacity to deal with the resulting level of financial impact is the federal government. A global pandemic is not the same as fixing potholes or sprucing up the downtown core. It affects the whole country.

And then as part of the oversight of that federal program, states and municipalities have to ensure they are meeting the required standards of application. If it is deemed at a federal level that the City of Nashville is not applying a sensible process in determining who gets shut down and who doesn't, then they are brought to task for that and need to fix their process.

 

[FossilFndr]

That's not what happened though. From the start they singled out certain types of businesses and then those businesses tried to fight them because they weren't being treated equally.

Frankly the City of Nashville should have been forced to pay every owner and employee during that time. If you have the authority to shut them down then you should have the responsibility of maintaining them so they are able to reopen afterwards.

That is nor was it ever going to happen because Cooper didn't give a damn and I'm still not convinced there wasn't some ulterior motive behind that.

Maybe Nashville raise taxes on residents, employers and employees so they can pay employers and employees?

 

[triggrman]

Maybe Nashville raise taxes on residents, employers and employees so they can pay employers and employees?

By let's say, 35%?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

By let's say, 35%?

There should be SOME agreed upon contingency plan for this, though. Whether that's the number and that's the level where the taxes are applied is open to debate. But we should be prepared for these things. Not just wing it with haphazard application. We got off lightly with this pandemic because it's actually not THAT devastating from a health perspective. Still bad, but almost a warning shot in some ways.

There should be an emergency measures bill that does lay out a better way to handle the Next One. And if that involves cranking up our taxes 35% to cover off the financial impact, I don't think that's a show-stopper. I think also all employers should have a mandatory emergency fund that they pay into in the meantime to supplement government aid. It should be a form of business insurance that you just have to factor in. So that we don't have to trade off health risks vs. economy/livelihoods next time around.

 

[Armourboy]

By let's say, 35%?

I think most people would have been fine with the 35% if that was what it was for. It wasn't though, it was so the city could keep blowing money just like they were without taking a look at anything.

Oddly enough, now that they are under threat of losing it they are taking a look at things. It blows my mind that these cities never learn a thing from other places that have had issues. They just do the same dumb stuff and then wake up one day like its somehow new.

The Council and the Mayor could have also gone a long way towards it as well if they hadn't of kicked the insurance down the road and had done something like a rolling furlough.

If you are a business owner or an employee who is forced to sit at home, how understanding are you going to be when the city isn't doing a thing with it's own employees?

 

[triggrman]

Let me add something here. Those that don't live here, don't understand what shutting down bars means. To you, it's no big deal, to us, many of our family and friends are now out of work. Many life long businesses here are closing their doors for good. It's not just closing a bar....

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Let me add something here. Those that don't live here, don't understand what shutting down bars means. To you, it's no big deal, to us, many of our family and friends are now out of work. Many life long businesses here are closing their doors for good. It's not just closing a bar....

Every place in the world has bars and every place has gone through variations of shutting them down or restricting them. If you had somebody working in airlines or tourism or any of the dozens of other places that took a hit, you could come up with the same personal anecdotes. It's not that it's "no big deal"... indeed, Covid IS a big deal. And your government let everybody down by protecting NEITHER your health NOR those peoples' incomes. That IS a big deal. But many people are misdirecting their anger about it and just seem to want to take an even worse approach.

 

[triggrman]

Again, it’s not just bars and you don’t live here

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Again, it’s not just bars and you don’t live here

So what... nobody's bars (or any other businesses) anywhere should ever be affected because somebody somewhere feels a personal attachment of some sort to them? We just get all misty-eyed and hide from the problem instead of doing something constructive about it? Yeah, a pandemic is not nice. Maybe if people start to realize just how serious it is they'll start to take some personal responsibility for a change.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Anyway, I think the key is we just shouldn't have to "guess" anymore. It was fair to guess back in March-April-May because there wasn't any data. Pick the things that seem likely to present transmission risks, and shut them down. Ok. But now we have lots of data. It can't be looked at just anecdotally or locally or with personal bias, however. Some people like to go to bars or work in that industry, so of course they would like it if their industry wasn't affected. Some people might have 3 kids playing hockey and would like it if that lifestyle wasn't shut down again. But the key is somebody outside of these personal special interests should be able to intelligently assess the data we have and make the appropriate objective decisions.

 

[lstcyr]

Anyway, I think the key is we just shouldn't have to "guess" anymore. It was fair to guess back in March-April-May because there wasn't any data. Pick the things that seem likely to present transmission risks, and shut them down. Ok. But now we have lots of data. It can't be looked at just anecdotally or locally or with personal bias, however. Some people like to go to bars or work in that industry, so of course they would like it if their industry wasn't affected. Some people might have 3 kids playing hockey and would like it if that lifestyle wasn't shut down again. But the key is somebody outside of these personal special interests should be able to intelligently assess the data we have and make the appropriate objective decisions.

We shouldn't have to guess but unfortunately with a serious lack of testing in the country I don't believe we have the data we need to do a comprehensive analysis.

 

[triggrman]

We shouldn't have to guess but unfortunately with a serious lack of testing in the country I don't believe we have the data we need to do a comprehensive analysis.

Testing isn’t a problem here. Hasn’t been

 

[101st_fan]

We shouldn't have to guess but unfortunately with a serious lack of testing in the country I don't believe we have the data we need to do a comprehensive analysis.

The US number of tests comes out to almost one test administered per three people. Only Israel and UK have conducted more tests per capita than the USA ... but about that "serious lack of testing".