Live data from Hacker News

America is giving up on the pandemic?

theatlantic.com

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where'd they "tell us there is no risk from these protests"? The letter you linked explicitly advises us to "prepare for an increased number of infections in the days following a protest [and] provide increased access to testing and care for people in the affected communities, especially when they or their family members put themselves at risk by attending protests." They just seem to think protesting America's rampa…

[flagged]

Sadly there are many such irregularities in today’s socially acceptable right think. A lot of logic is being replaced by emotion.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#342
post #13
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you assemble because you want to work. Then the media will paint you in the worst light possible an act like you are actively murdering grandma.

Assemble carrying weapons and with half the crowd claiming that the entire disease is fake, though?

Does what someone is carrying - but not using - make their assembly invalid?

Does what someone think make their assembly invalid?

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is the double standard with which some protestors were condemned while others were lauded based solely on which causes (and which classes of people) the commenters happened to politically support. It's transparently unprincipled, to the point of being a sad joke.

That's not a double standard. That's just a standard. When one group of people is holding signs that say "stop murdering people" and the other group is holding signs that say "I need a haircut," and you're mad that "the commenters" are not treating them the same, the problem is not with the commenters.

If by "I need a haircut" you mean to say "I am unemployed, verging on destitution and eviction, along with 30 Million other Americans" then maybe you have a point.

The trivialization of other people's causes, especially those that should engender sympathy (literally 10's of millions of those in the weakest economic situations), is a 'root cause' here.

If a very serious healthcare issue is politicized, we're all in trouble.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is the double standard with which some protestors were condemned while others were lauded based solely on which causes (and which classes of people) the commenters happened to politically support. It's transparently unprincipled, to the point of being a sad joke.

That's not a double standard. That's just a standard. When one group of people is holding signs that say "stop murdering people" and the other group is holding signs that say "I need a haircut," and you're mad that "the commenters" are not treating them the same, the problem is not with the commenters.

Your framing of the situation is biased.

I could say: "One group is holding signs that say 'Let us reopen. I have 2 children to feed' and another group is calling for police abolition while smashing in the windows of small businesses and murdering people" and it would be just as valid of a description as yours. It's not a fair description though.

Maybe your framing is the result of not having a wide enough array of news sources.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On average the police kill ~80 unarmed people each year, of any race [1]. By comparison, 40 million people are unemployed as a result of the pandemic and lockdown. Certainly, the impact of someone unjustly killed is vastly larger than that of someone laid off or furloughed. But is it 500,000 times greater? These are different issues. They aren't equivalent, but they're comparable at least. Pointing out the inconsiste…

Where are you getting 80 from? The link says 1,043 in the past year. Did you mean 80 per month?

They said 80 unarmed, meaning the rest of the 1043 were armed.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where'd they "tell us there is no risk from these protests"? The letter you linked explicitly advises us to "prepare for an increased number of infections in the days following a protest [and] provide increased access to testing and care for people in the affected communities, especially when they or their family members put themselves at risk by attending protests." They just seem to think protesting America's rampa…

[flagged]

1.) I don't agree with taking such "both sides" a view of equating the two: BLM protests are about protesting police brutality, religious congregations are not. Quarantine protests are underplaying the dangers of coronavirus: people participating in BLM protests, by and large, have no misconceptions of coronavirus. Whether or not you prioritize this above or below police brutality is of course something you place on your own moral scale, but trying to equate the two like this is super disingenuous.

Additionally, what are you even going to do? Use the violence of the state to tell people not to protest against the use of violence conducted by the state?

2.) Lower income minorities are the ones who are often afraid to call the police, due to the widespread racial bias in policing across the US. Do not speak for them if they themselves have very low confidence in the police: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/09/29/the-racial-confid...

3.) It's not racist to criticize the Chinese government. It is, however, racist to misattribute the actions of the CPC to the actions of "the Chinese", which happens far too often.

4.) I don't even understand this point. You can't easily pick and choose what people are deciding to protest about: there is nobody at the top saying "we should protest about BLM and not the Chinese government." And especially don't conflate property destruction with what these protests stand for.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting 80 from? The link says 1,043 in the past year. Did you mean 80 per month?

They said 80 unarmed, meaning the rest of the 1043 were armed.

another ~140 were armed with "toy weapons", such as the infamous shooting of Tamir Rice. But it's unclear whether that should go into the category of "unarmed" since this is still a threat perceived by police. Here is an image of Rice's toy gun: https://www.cleveland.com/resizer/CbjnPy-8-HkfIl1ApQ431f_Dlh...

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On average the police kill ~80 unarmed people each year, of any race [1]. By comparison, 40 million people are unemployed as a result of the pandemic and lockdown. Certainly, the impact of someone unjustly killed is vastly larger than that of someone laid off or furloughed. But is it 500,000 times greater? These are different issues. They aren't equivalent, but they're comparable at least. Pointing out the inconsiste…

There is _far_ more harm in unjust policing than is counted in deaths per year.

Same for coronavirus and for economic hardship.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source on Florida trying to actively minimize cases / deaths? Also, I thought the incubation period was more like 3-14 days, not 14-21?

There has been a lot of confusion if FL does/will list deaths from 'snowbirds'. IMO, this highlights the weakness of poor federal oversight and leadership in the pandemic. https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/04/11/floridas-cou...

According to CDC policy, a person's state of residence is where their death should be reported. That mitigates the likelihood of double counting, etc. Unfortunately, that does create a delay but that's neither a new nor deceptive practice.

Re: America is giving up on the pandemic?

#350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

N95 protects you. Cheapo masks protect other people. That's only useful with a much higher percentage of mask usage than observed in the US. Think this through. 50% use masks, 5% are spreading the disease. Interact with 100 people over a period of time. - Masks which protect others: (0.95)^50 chance of non-exposure = 0.6%. 92% of population exposed. - Masks which protect you: 50% of population exposed. This is oversi…

If a common mask protects you 50%, then that is a huge win both as an individual and as a group. Saying Assuming 0% in your calculations is biased. I think your word “cheapo” is derogatory. Are people just being cheap when they don’t buy an N95 mask? Saying “cheapo” masks only protect others is an incorrect conclusion: your language is also misleading.

Anything which leaks when you inhale doesn't protect you. If you take a deep breath and don't feel the mask pulled against your face, it's not working.

There's now a huge supply of poor to useless masks available, many with phony approval markings.[1] That's most of what's being sold on Amazon. It's moderately hard to make a mask which seals tightly, doesn't offer too much resistance to breathing, and filters to N95 standards.

A real N95 mask (3M 8210) is about $1.25 if you can get it. Some of the fakes are much more expensive.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-files-charges-against-chine...

Post reply on HN