OT: Covid-19 (Part 31) Alone Again... (Warning post#787)

Status
Not open for further replies.

waffledave

waffledave, from hf
Aug 22, 2004
33,440
15,782
Montreal
If they're not going to accept living with the virus, then ya...shut it all down, like we did before.
Ideally though, you stick with it, penalize the businesses that aren't following measures, and only address the big outbreaks. You have 6 cases coming from that gym? Okay, well, shutdown that business for two weeks, or more if they were negligent.

Schools are obviously a problem. Pretending like they're not isn't helping.

I mean, the virus isn't picky. It's not like it doesn't spread in certain businesses over others.

If you are indoors with other people for any prolonged period of time, then you run the risk of getting sick. That's it.

Just because we haven't seen cases of big outbreaks in gyms, or cinemas, doesn't mean that the virus magically doesn't spread there. Truth is, when these businesses were open, the virus just wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Now, with the higher infection rates, the risk is higher, everywhere. So, they're closing down as many businesses as is feasible where people are indoors around others for longer periods.

Nobody is denying that schools are vectors for infections. But what's the solution? They can't close schools down. If they close schools down, they need to close everything down, because parents can't work if their kids have nowhere to go during the day. Like it or not, schools are up there with essentials like groceries and pharmacies. If gyms and bars and restaurants need to be sacrificed in order to keep schools open, well, that's just how it's going to need to be. They are way higher on the totem pole.

If this makes you angry, that's ok, because it should. Direct your anger at the people who are gathering, having parties, having friends/family over, taking "calculated risks" (which is f***ing bullshit, by the way), and businesses that don't enforce masks and distancing.

It's because of them that your sacrifice, and the sacrifice of so many businesses, is all for nothing. And yeah, that includes grandma hugging grandkids. There is no such thing as a calculated risk. For this to work, everyone needs to be on board.
 

waffledave

waffledave, from hf
Aug 22, 2004
33,440
15,782
Montreal
Why would it?
How's your choice suddenly more important than theirs? So you have to be responsible for other people's choice too now?
Your parents are grown ups, if they decide to see you then it's on them. Just like it's on you when you see someone else.
Being selfish is having the virus and not telling people, or being in contact with someone who had it but choosing not to get tested...
Seeing your kid or you seeing your folks is not selfish. We are human beings, physical interaction is just part of our nature.

Ok. Then don't get mad that the gym isn't open. Because it's the cumulative effect of everyone "being human" that these businesses are closed and suffering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LyricalLyricist

MSLs absurd thighs

Formerly Tough Au Lit
Feb 4, 2013
9,424
4,280
90% efficiency is definitely more that I expected, even if those are preliminary reports. I imagined the first vaccines would be around 50 or 60% efficient. A vaccine with that much efficiency could very well by all accounts kill this pandemic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: llamateizer

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
Okay, so we close it all down, dropped the case around 600
Then open up again, cases starts climbing above 600......closed it all down again, rinse repeat.
Is that a better plan?

I mean if closing is the only option they can think of, then ya. As opposed to closing a few industries for 6 weeks and preventing gatherings leading to no improvement in numbers.
Personally I don't think they should close anything unless there are outbreaks, just add restrictions to make things safer. Close individual businesses, not an entire industry.
 

waffledave

waffledave, from hf
Aug 22, 2004
33,440
15,782
Montreal
90% efficiency is definitely more that I expected, even if those are preliminary reports. I imagined the first vaccines would be around 50 or 60% efficient. A vaccine with that much efficiency could very well by all accounts kill this pandemic.

It's not yet peer reviewed but this is definitely good news. Most people expected 50% for the first vaccine and this would have been good enough.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
I mean if closing is the only option they can think of, then ya. As opposed to closing a few industries for 6 weeks and preventing gatherings leading to no improvement in numbers.
Personally I don't think they should close anything unless there are outbreaks, just add restrictions to make things safer. Close individual businesses, not an entire industry.

The problem is what you're suggesting is reactive.

Most bars aren't consistently causing spreads. It's not like X bar is causing issues every week. What happens is there is an outbreak once here then another somewhere else and so on.

Closing them after the fact is too late as they aren't a consistent spreader.
 

GoodKiwi

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 23, 2006
18,519
4,129
Screen Shot 2020-11-09 at 11.12.37 AM.png
Screen Shot 2020-11-09 at 11.12.57 AM.png
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
I mean, the virus isn't picky. It's not like it doesn't spread in certain businesses over others.

If you are indoors with other people for any prolonged period of time, then you run the risk of getting sick. That's it.
Ya, which is...everywhere. Offices, factory work, schools, malls, stores, costco, etc.

Just because we haven't seen cases of big outbreaks in gyms, or cinemas, doesn't mean that the virus magically doesn't spread there. Truth is, when these businesses were open, the virus just wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Now, with the higher infection rates, the risk is higher, everywhere. So, they're closing down as many businesses as is feasible where people are indoors around others for longer periods.
It *can spread there, not that it actually is. It can spread anywhere, that's the point. We already know this, so unless you're planning on closing everything you need to target the areas/businesses where it actually is spreading. They're not doing that because there will be too much blowback, not just publicly but economically as well. They won't shutdown construction, or manufacturing, or schools, or retail, so they go after the smaller guys that's more recreational like F&B, gyms/spas, cinemas...
It's much easier to tell little Melanie to close down her yoga studio than to go after the retail/wholesale industry who employs 2.7M people throughout Canada.
They're beating on the small guys.

Nobody is denying that schools are vectors for infections. But what's the solution? They can't close schools down. If they close schools down, they need to close everything down, because parents can't work if their kids have nowhere to go during the day. Like it or not, schools are up there with essentials like groceries and pharmacies. If gyms and bars and restaurants need to be sacrificed in order to keep schools open, well, that's just how it's going to need to be. They are way higher on the totem pole.
Well that's fine, and if that's the case, come out and say it. Don't pretend like schools aren't an issue because if they lie, all it leads to is people not trusting and listening to them. It opens the door to arguments like ''so my kid can gather with 20-30 other students in a shitty ass classroom barely ventilated for hours on end...but I can't go see my friend for a beer? f*** right off Legault.''
That's all it leads to.
And they don't want people looking at schools because they'll notice a lot of them were completely disorganized.
If this makes you angry, that's ok, because it should. Direct your anger at the people who are gathering, having parties, having friends/family over, taking "calculated risks" (which is f***ing bullshit, by the way), and businesses that don't enforce masks and distancing.
I'm not going to be upset with people for acting..you know...like normal humans.
Government predicted in April there would be a 2nd wave coming and they did close to nothing to prepare.
My teacher friends had their first meeting about schools the thursday before the monday they opened and they had nothing prepared. My friend had to remind the school 5 times that the windows in her classroom didn't open because they're old and rusty. All summer to prepare but did nothing.
So no, I'm not going to be upset for people gathering and having parties because I knew this would happen. You can't avoid it. I worked in Saudi mate, people can get in some really serious trouble for partying with booze, yet they're constantly doing it.

It's because of them that your sacrifice, and the sacrifice of so many businesses, is all for nothing. And yeah, that includes grandma hugging grandkids. There is no such thing as a calculated risk. For this to work, everyone needs to be on board.
At some point you need to accept reality as well. People are not going to stop gathering. Unless you become way more drastic, curfews, jail time, it ain't happening and the longer this virus stays the less and less people will listen. So, might be a good time to figure out a different strategy than the blame game.
Know your audience. You will never have everybody on board if you aren't transparent.
Ok. Then don't get mad that the gym isn't open. Because it's the cumulative effect of everyone "being human" that these businesses are closed and suffering.
How is it? we had reopened mate. The people didn't do anything new over the summer that made our numbers rise. The partying happened all summer too and we didn't have these crazy jumps in numbers. We didn't even see an increase after the marches/protests in the streets after George Floyd. The opposite actually, cases were steadily declining.
People didn't suddenly change their behavior in September.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
The problem is what you're suggesting is reactive.

Most bars aren't consistently causing spreads. It's not like X bar is causing issues every week. What happens is there is an outbreak once here then another somewhere else and so on.

Closing them after the fact is too late as they aren't a consistent spreader.

Everything we do is reactive mate. They closed down some things again because our cases went up, that's reactive as well. They just didn't target the right businesses or enough of them, hence failing to reverse the trend.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
Everything we do is reactive mate. They closed down some things again because our cases went up, that's reactive as well. They just didn't target the right businesses or enough of them, hence failing to reverse the trend.

I think there’s a difference though.

Reacting to individual businesses isn’t same as reacting to a trend.

I do think individual businesses should be held responsible but that won’t stop a trend as outbreaks jump from location to location.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
I think there’s a difference though.

Reacting to individual businesses isn’t same as reacting to a trend.

I do think individual businesses should be held responsible but that won’t stop a trend as outbreaks jump from location to location.

Meh. It's not really different though. We are constantly reacting to this virus.
For the record, I'm not suggesting we just let people do whatever. You still take smart measures, reducing capacity, making sure mask/social distancing is respected, change ways of operations if possible, etc.
If a place sees an outbreak, you close them not because you think it'll stop a spread, you do it so all the staff can get tested and quarantined.
Burgundy Lion did it this summer. One client and one staff tested positive, they shut down their bar so soon as they found out, tested all the staff that crossed path, released a statement online, and reopened 10 days later I believe.
 

Milhouse40

Registered User
Aug 19, 2010
22,113
24,690
I mean if closing is the only option they can think of, then ya. As opposed to closing a few industries for 6 weeks and preventing gatherings leading to no improvement in numbers.
Personally I don't think they should close anything unless there are outbreaks, just add restrictions to make things safer. Close individual businesses, not an entire industry.

If you need to get hit in the face before acting......you'll always be 2 steps behind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad