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

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#521

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

abduhl wrote: post #412
polote wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the issue. Best case in term of covid related death is to keep everyone at home, no freedom and get food delivery directly at the door Worst case, is to do as nothing happened There are a spectrum of possible responses. But we have to accept that some people are going to die if we want other to live. Each group can put the cursor where it wants, but you can't have, no death and complete freedom. Some peop…

This post highlights my favorite part of the keep everyone home argument: "get food delivery directly at the door." Who delivers the food if we keep everyone home? There is a subtle classist underpinning to the entire "Stay The Fuck Home" message which really shows how little people value others, especially lower-class (food delivery) or blue collar (food supply) workers. Everyone needs to stay home, except for the d…

Not to mention the majority of people in this nation cannot afford to use ubereats on a daily basis.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#522

Post by Swizec »

Jommi wrote: post #294
Swizec wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I’m not out there licking their face. Isn’t distancing, the plexiglass screens, and mask wearing supposed to fix my risk to others? If memory serves, the probability of transmission is under 1% with those measures.

Its supposed to reduce it, but we don't know how much. We also don't know how well those standards are adhered to. Could you link the study that backs the 1%? How is that statement better than just coming up with a number?

Here’s the best I can find. The 1.5% comes from a viral image of why masks are important.

CDC says the numbers “show the right idea” but we don’t yet have studies that yield a specific percentage.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/verify...

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#523

Post by throwawaygh »

arkadiytehgraet wrote: post #497
nightski wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market recovery is not due to the government "buying the stock market" because they never did that. If you look at winners and losers in the stock market, followed the Q2 earnings season and saw what companies were facing, it seems clear to me that our economy faced a transition rather than a crash. There are huge winners in this market. Home Depot, Target, and other major retailers all announced record bre…

Dude (or dudess or whatever), Fed literally has positions in all sorts of stocks, including bankrupt HTZ. How is that not "buying the stock market"?

Wrong.

Fed did not purchase a single share of HTZ.

They hold two ETFs that include Hertz corporate bonds. Not stocks. Bonds. And not new issues.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#524

Post by baddox »

sushshshsh wrote: post #410
baddox wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's roughly equivalent to asking "if someone drives drunk, will they kill someone else or not?" Many times, they won't hurt anyone, but I hope it's not controversial that driving drunk is still extremely dangerous.

Today I learned that getting a haircut with a mask on is equivalent to driving drunk, but protesting or going to a grocery store with a mask on is not.

No one said anything remotely close to that.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#525

Post by res0nat0r »

esalman wrote: post #293
polote wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it amazing we can not see short term sacrifice for long term gain. Maybe because nobody successfully proved to these people (me included) that this sacrifice is useful. You can't tell to people, you have no risk of dying (0.5% death rate for population, much much lower for healthy and young people), people who are at risk of dying can protect themselves even around sick people (wearing a mask, staying at hom…

US didn't have a federal strategy to deal with the pandemic. They shot at their own foot and didn't give themselves a chance to be successful. The rest of the (developed, and many underdeveloped) world dealt with it and are moving on. I'm watching Champions league finals on TV and Wuhan pool party clips on twitter, thinking wtf went wrong here.

Also we shouldn't forget that "American independence" really also means "selfish". Many Americans can care less who dies, as long as it directly doesn't affect them, thus fights about simple things like mask compliance, or not going to a bar for a while.

That in addition to the federal government not supporting people and businesses while the economy is shut down, leads to this obvious outcome we're experiencing right now.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#526

Post by chillwaves »

polote wrote: post #393
jurassic wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vulnerable people have needs that are supplied by the broader community (food, medicines, medical care, etc) so it's impossible to fully isolate vulnerable populations.

let's do like, china and directly deliver food to them. Every citizen of the us has been sent a 1200 check, US is able to fund a service like that also

$1200 check sent out like 4 months ago. That money is long gone.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#527

Post by cloakandswagger »

showdeadtest wrote: post #371
andrelayer wrote: post #332

I think a lot of people in this discussion are pitting the argument at people prioritizing their individual choices over the collective health of the community. I think that is a very singular framing from one side. A lot of people I know just believe that the virus itself is not as deadly as the reaction warrants. The infectious mortality rate of Covid is at best twice that of the normal flu, which isn't nothing and…

To amplify this, while I appreciate the passion some people have for community health, there has been a pattern of bald-faced lying that is unsustainable and potentially counterproductive. I can see somebody going to the gym and not feeling bad about it for that reason alone.

As most authoritarian-collectivist movements go, the "Stay the fuck home" crowd took no time at all in destroying all goodwill towards their worldview.

Had its tone been more educational and pleading instead of arrogant, shaming and outright threatening they could have avoided polarizing the conversation and creating a contrarian counter-movement that resists even sensible compromise.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#528

Post by daseiner1 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #306
at-fates-hands wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering most states have been in full on shelter in place lock down mode, there aren't many places people can socialize anyways. All of the normal places where you see people socialize have bee closed or went out business. Restaurants, bars, night clubs, sporting events, live music (festivals and stadiums) and many, many others. It would be one thing to conform to what your saying, but its become hard if not impo…

Parks? Backyards? A walk around the neighborhood? Outdoor dining? If you can't socialize outside a bar, that's on you.

I had just graduated college and moved to a new city on a new coast before lockdowns started. I essentially have no in-person social network to speak of, currently. My parents lived overseas up until a month ago. Folks my age (early 20s) are happy to socialize with their established friends. Less so with strangers. All the places shut down are the standard avenues for folks like me to meet new people. I was entirely alone for 4 months. My life was hell. And all the while my company talks about difficulties being at home with family, and figuring out childcare (and has freed up resources to help their employees do so). No mention, ever, of any effort to establish meetups for low-risk, early-career employees, not that I'd expect that. No one particularly cares about people in my situation (not that rare).

Comments like this and the ever popular "it's just a mask!" show a remarkable lack of awareness and understanding. Yes, that's perhaps overly selfish of me. Yes, there are people at serious risk, and many people dying or developing life-long serious complications. But this has been the worst period in my entire life, by far. I was regularly, very seriously, suicidal (have since moved back in with my parents now that they're stateside, starting to get better). All the policies and all the talk are oriented around having a network of close relations to fall back on. That doesn't exist for everyone.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#529

Post by qotgalaxy »

dang wrote: post #502
monadic2 wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuck you.

Yikes, posting like this will get you banned on HN, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. We've had to ask you about this kind of thing before. Could you please take the spirit of the site more to heart? HN is a community of millions of people in many countries. It is inevitably divided on any issue where society (societies) are deeply divided. We can't get anywhere by pretending otherwise. We…

His response is perfectly reasonable.
Post reply on HN