Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

sfmayor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 893 posts

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#161

Post by MrGando »

cobookman wrote: post #80
primeradical wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To anyone reading the comment above, it is extremely poor advice and should not be followed. Stay at home and shelter in place orders are not solely for the purpose of protecting ones-self from contracting the virus. They also serve to limit the spread from unsuspecting carriers. You can carry and spread the virus unknowingly and this will result in susceptible people contracting it and dying. The only way we know th…

So when do you lift the stay in place? When there's 0 cases? If so, what if that never happens?

You start doing it when you can gather enough information, fast enough to prevent new spikes from happening. The number of "known cases" becomes very low, and then ideally one can react fast enough when new clusters start forming.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#162

Post by walterbell »

People forget that there is no law which can put everyone under house arrest. This is all done voluntarily.

Why is it ok for people to shop at Walmart and not at their local small business that sells the same goods and is better equipped to enforce social distancing, with customers explicitly opting in to visit the smaller store?

If a small business can protect workers and customers, and a comparable large business is already open, the small business can consider opening and preparing to litigate all the way to the Supreme Court. With video cameras ready.

There may be a few hundred bored lawyers who remember the US constitution and would take their case pro bono. The federal government recently said it is willing to join lawsuits against states, on constitutional grounds.

Obviously, the business in question should be carefully chosen to maximize health, legal and business outcomes. But with many businesses shutdown, there's a large pool of candidates to be triaged.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#163

Post by tptacek »

djrogers wrote: post #153
tptacek wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a talking point, not an argument. In reality the state governments have broad powers, stemming back to jurisprudence from the time of the framers (cases involving these powers were heard by John Marshal), to employ police powers in the service of quarantines, and those powers were further spelled out by statute as recently as the 2000s in the wake of 9/11. None of those powers are constrained by any notion of…

> there are rational goals to quarantines beyond keeping the hospitals occupied at an optimal level None of the counties in the San Francisco Bay Area have been willing to outline any specific goals, nor has our Governor. If you can point me to anything more specific from the above than 'if we only save one life', I'd be shocked.

What's your point? Is there a statute you're thinking of that requires San Francisco to spell out specifically what their goals are? You said upthread that the lockdown is a violation of people's constitutional rights, but it seems clear that it isn't, at least not in our jurisprudence. You can find legal scholars debating the constitutionality of quarantine, but only in the context of hypothetical orders that haven't been issued by any state yet that would imprison people in their homes (the way China apparently did). If you don't even have the broad strokes of this right, it seems fair to ask for a citation here.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#164

Post by alexis_fr »

ravenstine wrote: post #96
scott_s wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen you say similar things in a few other threads, and myself and others have said, every time: the risk to everyone is that the hospitals become overwhelmed. They are not right now because of stay-at-home orders. What you think of as failure - hospitals currently low utilization - is in fact success .

The problem I see with that statement is that it's difficult, if not impossible to falsify. Hospitals are nowhere near being overwhelmed, in general, which means that they have some capacity to handle an outbreak if we lift restrictions gradually. I know people who work at hospitals in places like LA, and they've reported that activity is relatively slow. (of course in part because fewer people are going to the ER fo…

+ Deaths by obesity from staying home,

+ Home violence,

+ CO2-increased houses make people much less clever,

+ Demotivation/decrease of testosterone makes people durably less productive, further hampering our ability maintain the little flow of goods that’s left.

We are setting up ourselves for a much more deadly future.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#165

Post by blast »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #4

I'm lucky enough to have remote work. And I'm sure many HNers have a nice buffer of savings from their tech jobs to weather the storm or are getting paid time off. But can anyone share what it's like to not be in either of these situations? How are your rent lords handling things? I live abroad in a cheap country so I can handle zero income, but I wouldn't be able to last long if rent was $2000+/mo instead of the Yet…

It's a class divide, unfortunately. The people who are getting hit hardest are the people who were already getting hit hardest. Most of those don't frequent the same internet forums we do.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#166

Post by CPLX »

primeradical wrote: post #156
CPLX wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way we know that shelter in place orders worked is if they feel like an overreaction after this is all over with. That's the only way to know? You think it's reasonable to take away the civil liberties of seven million people indefinitely without at least trying to come up with a better performance metric than that? You have literally no interest in setting up any kind of plan to assess how the policy is w…

The only people losing civil liberties are the people that die after contracting the virus because we failed to social distance for the necessary amount of time. The "performance metric" you're looking for is the number of tests we conduct. Unless we're testing hundreds of thousands every day, we have no choice but to continue to shelter in place or stay at home. We are not even close to the amount of testing we need…

OK I'll take your bait. What if we have enough tests, then what's the rule?

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#167

Post by [deleted] »

scott_s wrote: post #29
marcell wrote: post #5

Blanket lockdown has to end. This policy has outlived its usefulness, and is harming people's quality of life without a clear goal. The initial premise of the "flatten the curve" memes was to avoid overwhelming hospitals. The shelter-in-place has not only had this effect, it's been too effective. Hospital utilization in the bay area is at around 10% when you count surge capacity that has been added [1]. Meanwhile, da…

I've seen you say similar things in a few other threads, and myself and others have said, every time: the risk to everyone is that the hospitals become overwhelmed. They are not right now because of stay-at-home orders. What you think of as failure - hospitals currently low utilization - is in fact success .

[deleted]

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#168

Post by arblify »

jaywalk wrote: post #81
quicklime wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, your right to shed virus particles ends at the tip of my nose.

That's a nice platitude you've got there. Too bad it means basically nothing.

It actually does mean something, which is that freedom is not unlimited. Your freedom of action ends at the point where it harms someone else. Classically, "your right to throw your fist ends at my face." It's the same reason (legally) you can't point a firearm at me.

What we have here is the problem that merely by breathing around someone, you can cause them harm. Unfortunately we lack the ability to determine whether or not you will, but given the contagiousness of this disease if you are infected (or become infected) it is quite likely.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#169

Post by jshevek »

glofish wrote: post #159

When I was younger I could never understand why anyone would vote republican. Today I understand.

Both parties are corrupt, and both advocate for reasonable and unreasonable policies. Part of their power derives from convincing much of their base to despise the "other side", to never properly listen to the other side, and never fairly consider the other side's position. Politicians on both sides benefit from inflaming this dynamic.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#170

Post by jupp0r »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #51

Serious question: if restrictions aren’t lifted now then will they be? What will be meaningfully different June 1st rather than May 1st? Is it shelter-in-place until we get more testing? Or the AppleGoogle contact tracing? Or is it shelter-in-place until a vaccine... in 18 months? What are the conditions required to start slowly relaxing the shutdown? Edit: I don’t understand the downvotes. I haven’t left my home for…

Here are the conditions for lifting the CA stay at home orders: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/California...

It basically comes down to being able to contain disease spread by contact tracing and testing.

Post reply on HN