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

Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#111

Post by hatsubai »

dfxm12 wrote: post #6

I don't get it. Unless you're training for a very specific purpose (like an MMA fight or football season), why do you need specific indoor gym equipment? Shelter in place orders are largely lifted, so you can workout outside: run, do pull ups on a tree branch, ride a bike, lift a heavy stone, do an outdoor yoga class, etc. Hell, you only need maybe a 6' x 6' area for a perfectly effective body weight routine, even in…

When I injured my back (years ago), I had to go to physical therapy and use specific machines that isolated the muscles in order to help regenerate muscle in the area. The physical therapy office was connected to a health center which was essentially a public gym. Together with my trainer, we used the facility's weight lifting and resistance band machines in a safe and controlled manner.

It has since healed, and I am better now. However, there was a point in time where I had to continue going to the gym and keep using those weight machines. It took a few years before I was back to normal and could start working with more generalized equipment. So there's more than just a sports-focused need (like MMA fighting or football) for gym equipment, and that equipment cannot easily be substituted, nor can it be done safely with a bike or a heavy stone.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#112

Post by komali2 »

ReptileMan wrote: post #97
oarsinsync wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What else is Qatar doing? What does Qatar do to a person who is confirmed infected? Does the same action occur to someone with the flu? What is Qatar asking it's population to do differently today, compared to this time a year ago? Does that have any meaningful impact on transmission rates?

It's pretty locked down. You have an app that unless it's says healthy you are not allowed into any public place. I illustrated it as a place in which there is so much mass testing that the mortality figures are more fact than fiction.

You deny the fact that at least 172,000 Americans have died from covid?

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#113

Post by throw0101a »

reaperducer wrote: post #50
adolph wrote: post #14

Unlike actual prohibition, the social agreement behind "lockdowns" is subject to time contingencies. The activities considered "essential" grow as time passes. While there are nominal categories of "essential" defined by community/political leaders, that contract depends on agreement. Since each person's conception of "essential" is different, as time passes "essential" grows exponentially instead of linearly.

Since each person's conception of "essential" is different There was someone on WGN-TV a few weeks ago lamenting that it was insulting for all of the hairdressers and manicurists and yoga instructors to be called "non-essential." I thought it was more insulting for that person to value the work of hairdressers and manicurists and yoga instructors on an equal basis with firefighters, doctors, paramedics, and actual re…

> I thought it was more insulting for that person to value the work of hairdressers and manicurists and yoga instructors on an equal basis with firefighters, doctors, paramedics, and actual real "essential" workers.

Part of fairness is in treating equal things equally, and unequal things unequally.

Even talking about non-first responders, the folks in supermarkets are more essential on this spectrum than beauticians of various niches IMHO.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#114

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

ultrarunner wrote: post #80
adolph wrote: post #14

Unlike actual prohibition, the social agreement behind "lockdowns" is subject to time contingencies. The activities considered "essential" grow as time passes. While there are nominal categories of "essential" defined by community/political leaders, that contract depends on agreement. Since each person's conception of "essential" is different, as time passes "essential" grows exponentially instead of linearly.

I always thought they should have called them “authorized” activities and businesses. The optics wouldn’t allow it, but it would have been more accurate all around and avoided these misunderstandings.

I think it's more than just optics, though. If they were called "authorized" businesses, it wouldn't just look bad - it'd be blindingly obvious why the specific set of shut down businesses should be responsive to public pressure and desires, rather than staying at some fixed level until public health authorities say otherwise.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#115

Post by Jommi »

juliansimioni wrote: post #95
dragosmocrii wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The last couple months has done more damage than good to me. I'm that type of person who'll lose muscle quickly if stops working out for mote than 2 weeks. I also played a couple games of volleyball and tennis, and I'm so clumsy I'm embarrassed I lost control of my body. Meanwhile, thr local gyms havr silly rules to restrict people's access...

You know what would really cause you to lose muscle? Getting a bad (or even mild) case of COVID. I'm an athlete myself so I get it. Working out is important. But people are reporting that they are not back to 100% even _months_ after the primary symptoms of COVID are gone. And health professionals are saying that it's very possible to lose things like lung capacity PERMANENTLY. Honestly that scares me more than the i…

You're just again repeating this same unscientific fearmongering as everyone else.

Yes, there are possible outcomes that are absolutely terrible and potentially even permanent! Nobody is debating this.

However, what we need to have a real and fact-based discussion is that how prevalent these outcomes are, what are they based on, and what groups are most affected.

Then we as a society can come together and choose what the appropriate response is.

Of course this all breaks down when you have a country of 382M people that refuses to even attempt the creation of smaller, more manageable communities.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#116

Post by ReptileMan »

juliansimioni wrote: post #95
dragosmocrii wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The last couple months has done more damage than good to me. I'm that type of person who'll lose muscle quickly if stops working out for mote than 2 weeks. I also played a couple games of volleyball and tennis, and I'm so clumsy I'm embarrassed I lost control of my body. Meanwhile, thr local gyms havr silly rules to restrict people's access...

You know what would really cause you to lose muscle? Getting a bad (or even mild) case of COVID. I'm an athlete myself so I get it. Working out is important. But people are reporting that they are not back to 100% even _months_ after the primary symptoms of COVID are gone. And health professionals are saying that it's very possible to lose things like lung capacity PERMANENTLY. Honestly that scares me more than the i…

It matters of course how many of how many are reporting that?

1/2 not worth it. 1/1000 - will take my chances. Covid seems to have flipped a switch in people's brains that make every probability 1.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#117

Post by Ansil849 »

parliament32 wrote: post #83
Ansil849 wrote: post #29

This seems incredibly dangerous. Are the speakeasy gyms requiring negative COVID tests? Are they doing temperature screenings upon entry? How diligently are they sanitizing equipment? How well ventilated are these various areas? Why are people ignoring all of these risks, what kind of threat model do they have?

They are doing exactly zero of those things, because of prohibition. That's the whole point of the article -- if you prohibit something, it'll happen anyway but quality will go down. A much better approach would be to require the things you mentioned (like my area did) by law instead of a blanket ban.

Yes, I agree. Which area are you in which does this? It would be a good counterpoint article.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#118

Post by reaperducer »

stagger87 wrote: post #64
reaperducer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since each person's conception of "essential" is different There was someone on WGN-TV a few weeks ago lamenting that it was insulting for all of the hairdressers and manicurists and yoga instructors to be called "non-essential." I thought it was more insulting for that person to value the work of hairdressers and manicurists and yoga instructors on an equal basis with firefighters, doctors, paramedics, and actual re…

Why do essential workers all have to be valued on an equal basis as firefighters, doctors, etc? How are you measuring value?

Why do essential workers all have to be valued on an equal basis as firefighters, doctors, etc?

Because that's what the word "essential" means: Things you can't do without. Not "things I really really really like."

How are you measuring value?

People who save lives > people who don't save lives.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#119

Post by komali2 »

hammock wrote: post #92
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks very much for explaining! I'm not entirely sure which part of my comment you're arguing against: > How is a gymgoer endangering you, if you are staying 6ft from all others, wearing a mask, washing your hands and not touching your face? Are you saying that as long as the measures you listed are followed, any additional shutdowns required by the local/state government are unreasonable and are okay to ignore? If…

>Are you saying that as long as the measures you listed are followed, any additional shutdowns required by the local/state government are unreasonable and are okay to ignore? Yes. How does a government shutdown help me, if I'm already isolated?

How isolated are you? You only eat food you've stored? You've been doing that the last 4 months?

If you go to the grocery store or receive deliveries, you're not isolated, and government policy that reduces viral spread benefits you.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#120

Post by MiroF »

hammock wrote: post #61
DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #31

Did the "shutdown normal gym" mean that patrons would be violating whatever policies forced the gym to shutdown in the first place? If so, that really bothers me. Any excess contagion would endanger everyone, not just the gym users. Please consider reporting the details to the appropriate authorities. EDIT: If someone is inclined to downvote this comment, I'd be very grateful for a clarification why (comment or DM).…

Downvoting because it's none of your business. Honest question - and if you choose to downvote me I'd ask you extend me the same courtesy you asked for - how is a gymgoer endangering you, if you are staying 6ft from all others, wearing a mask, washing your hands and not touching your face?

How is a reckless driver endangering you, if you are driving safely?
Post reply on HN