551–560 of 919 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outbound flights are going to get a hell of a lot more expensive if all the planes have to return to the US empty.
Nah, all planes are just going to be routed through a non-European destination en route back. The Azores are about to be very popular.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deaths are also much lower in the US.
Only vs. China, Iran and Italy. We're within a factor of two (that is, about 5-6 days) of everyone else. A 5-6 day head start is not enough window to save ourselves with a travel ban. And just like Italy went from "contained" to a country-wide lockdown in the space of a week, so will we at this point. Those tens of thousands of cases are incubating right now and will emerge in the coming days. This travel ban does no…
What are you on about? We have fewer deaths than far more countries than that (France and Spain for instance) and per capita we are doing even better.
The US has fewer deaths than the following countries per capita:
Italy, Iran, China, S. Korea, Spain, France, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Albania, Lebanon, Netherlands, Belgium, Panama, Ireland, Iraq, Bulgaria, Japan, Australia, UK
Country Population and coronavirus numbers can be pulled here:
This is insane. I haven’t been really scared of the pandemic yet, but if this is the response, now, I’m terrified. Changing the number of infected people entering the community does nothing when we already have transmission happening within the community at some fixed rate which is determined by the community . “Flattening the curve” of an exponential function means changing the rate of growth, not the fucking consta…
Who's going to die because they can't fly between the US and Europe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah, all planes are just going to be routed through a non-European destination en route back. The Azores are about to be very popular.
The ban is on the Schengen area, which does include the Azores.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, the case count is about to sky rocket because wide spread testing is coming online but hopefully the fatality count doesn't. I think the authorities need to do a better job communicating that a steep rise in cases detected doesn't mean a steep rise in severe or lethal cases.
you could start with getting the president and his sycophants to stop claiming its a partisan hoax and that it's going to go away in a few days
The president did claim that some criticisms about his handling of the situation were a "new hoax" in the same way he has labeled previous unfounded criticism and accusations as hoaxes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It cannot be contained. That’s what the pandemic declaration means (even though the WHO should have done this weeks ago). At this point, the only rational thing to do is to try to slow the spread. The good news is that this is a very mild virus, and the vast majority of infected people will have minor symptoms. The fatality rate in Korea is currently 0.6%, and becuase of the comprehensive nature of their testing, thi…
You realize mild means “didn’t require hospitalization”, right? Many “mild” cases are taking weeks to recover.
But more importantly, you’re not dying and not clogging up a hospital. That’s what’s relevant to this discussion.
Just de-boarded and re-boarded an aircraft going to Europe from NY because of this „small“ missing „detail“ in the initial announcement. 4h delay and the people who de-boarded the plane initially, are not re-boarding because they probably left the airport by now, not knowing they had wrong information. Ouch.
It's so dumb, immediate family members not applicable -- so check-in agents are now going to be in the business of examining birth certificates?
Let it stand as a reminder of how good we have it, and how fragile things actually are. It's a pandemic. There's going to be some bumps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My 2 cents. All reductions in (non-essential) travel are good in a pandemic. That doesn't mean it's sufficient, but it's something positive. I think we would all like to see stronger social distancing rules domestically (in the US), but here the US has a problem as it granted the President broad discretionary powers to suspend international travel but not domestic gatherings, which can't be banned via executive order…
>All reductions in (non-essential) travel are good in a pandemic. All travel is essential to somebody. All restrictions on movement also have a cost, and any analysis that only looks at the benefits of something without looking at the costs cannot hope to be correct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It IS happening in Italy, and it definitely happened in China. The difference is that Japan, South Korea and Singapore have much more powerful nationwide governments. This allowed them to put infection controls in place much earlier than we have in the USA. It remains to be seen where we top out, numbers-wise, vs. hospital capacity.
The Japanese response has actually been pretty lackluster and haphazard. I'm rather surprised rates there have not been exploding the way they did in Korea, Iran and Italy.