Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition • Hacker News Board

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#831

Post by johnwalkr » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:39 AM UTC

seizethecheese wrote: post #617

johnwalkr wrote: post #543

Wow with these comments. You going to the gym is not saving the economy. Yes, we can't shut everything down but you'd think the article was about shutting down grocery stores or the stock market. And by not doing your part, your whole community could be stunted for 2 years. Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) because you're healthy and passing on the risk to s…

> congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) because you're healthy and passing on the risk to some vulnerable person (probably your parents or a school teacher) with a 1 in 10 chance of death. This is wrong and misleading. You're quoting the average fatality rate for "healthy" people, but the distribution doesn't look like that at all. Then, you cherrypick 10% out of now…

This is a general reply, not only to the parent comment. I’m indeed cherry-picking though I didn’t carefully check the numbers. My point is we need to sacrifice some of the more trivial things and make minimal efforts to ride this out, and by not changing our lifestyles, we are passing the risk on to others, some of whom may be vulnerable and some of whom don’t have any option to not go to work (for example) to reduce their risk. You are making their risk higher by going to the gym and potentially contracting the virus, infecting your kids, and sending them to school where one of the teachers maybe has an underlying condition (for example).

I’m not arguing for total lockdown. I’m arguing for avoiding the more risky activities that involve heavy breathing in close quarters so total lockdown can be avoided. Local governments mostly know this, and have set policies accordingly. In general they should do a better job of compensating businesses in the short term since it’s not the gym owner’s fault (for example) that his business happens to have been risky right now.

I don’t think it’s good behavior to go out of your way to circumvent a public health policy based on a personal risk tolerance.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#832

Post by porknubbins » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:42 AM UTC

“Fancy fit”, that is brutal haha. Some guy probably spent hours every week painfully doing the right mix of weightlifting, HIT and yoga to achieve that lean but muscular look popular with a certain class of women, probably thinks he looks tough and gets called “fancy”. At some point I’d just embrace being fat.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#833

Post by s1artibartfast » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:49 AM UTC

duderific wrote: post #594

cloakandswagger wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Lives are at stake here, so the "Stay the fuck home" crowd, as you put it, has a right to express feelings that may be stronger than "educational and pleading."

People have a right to shout, but their interests would be better served if they didn't.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#834

Post by ironman1478 » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:50 AM UTC

honkycat wrote: post #233

readingnews wrote: post #211

There is a crossfit gym that I pass by every morning on the way to work. It is full, and never stopped during this pandemic. Even at 7AM, it is full of patrons. I would call the "proper authorities", but since there is a State Police car parked outside every morning, and he is in there working out, just like before the pandemic, I doubt calling anyone would do anything. Adding to the post, I read it earlier... it is…

Introverts vs extroverts. Humans are social animals. Socialization is a basic human need. It is much harder for some people to stay inside and not socialize than others. We are now on month 7 of being told to not socialize or see or do anything. I continue to obey the orders, but I totally get why some people are starting to crack.

I'm an extrovert. I can find ways to occupy my time. I've picked up drawing, meditation, and running. I want to talk to people in person, get drinks, go to shows, etc. It's not hard to find something else to do for a short amount of time in the grand scheme of things. Get a therapist if it's that difficult. Preventing the spread of disease is more important than hanging out with your friends. The burden of the disease falls on people like nurses, essential workers, etc. and you are making their jobs miserable because they can't even take any break now (this is the situation at mother's hospital). Just be less selfish. It's easy

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#835

Post by hehsjsbb » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:54 AM UTC

DuskStar wrote: post #799

rootusrootus wrote: post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Masks have really torn everyone apart No. No, no no. Masks have torn nobody apart. They could have brought us together. One segment of the population embraced politics and decided that masks was the last straw among all of the rules they otherwise accept in their lives, and decided to turn it into a public statement. These people are the ones that have torn everyone apart and ripped up the social contract. The rest…

> One segment of the population embraced politics and decided that masks was the last straw among all of the rules they otherwise accept in their lives, and decided to turn it into a public statement. Let's not pretend that there isn't a "wear masks because of politics" segment in the US, too. It's been turned into signalling on both sides, to the detriment of us all.

Why would you wear a mask solely because of politics? It's a good thing to do that has no downsides and it might help other people. It might even help you. Worst case it was a little inconvenience.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#836

Post by zucker42 » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:56 AM UTC

coryfklein wrote: post #646

gmanley wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still surprised there is so much misinformation about this. There are two categories of masks. The first category only prevent you from spreading the disease. These include paper surgical masks, cloth masks and those blue disposable paper masks. These are only made to prevent you from spreading droplets in the air from your moth and nose. If someone with covid isn't wearing a mask this category won't do anything…

> this category won't do anything prevent you from catching it. Are you saying there have been studies showing approximately 0% reduced risk of infection from wearing a paper or cloth mask? I'd have assumed that these masks are much less effective than an N95, but I haven't seen any data showing they have no effect .

There are no studies that I know of that show that cloth masks provide protection for the wearer. The consensus now seems to be that they are effective at decreasing the likelihood that a sick person spreads it to a healthy person if sick people wear them.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#837

Post by shadowprofile77 » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:56 AM UTC

jorblumesea wrote: post #817

helaoban wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like somebody with no skin in the game. Go preach this nonsense to small business owners that have had their livelihoods taken from them and see how long you can keep your head above the parapet. > Support temporary benefits to your fellow citizens. What benefits? Support how? Prayers? Support that small business in your community with your wallet. > Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance…

There are people with actual skin in the games, you know, their lives. Your business goes under it sucks but you won't die. Only in America would people legitimately make the argument that it's ok to expose people to risk because people someone is losing money. Who are you to put a value on my loved ones lives? 1/100 chance, 1/1000 chance, why does any of that matter? Fuck your business, it won't bring my parents bac…

You do realize that this "somebody losing money" in the aggregate relates not just to some cliche notion of greedy capitalists getting angry about a few less bags of money. Instead it literally means economic ruin possibly hitting millions of people and less directly causing tens if not hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide, not to mention destroyed families, individual lives and all sorts of psychological and social consequences that go far, far beyond simple greed.

Everything in the world fits along some scale of costs and benefits, and your emotional reaction shouldn't get to ignore that. Your loved ones lives literally do have to balance against the possible consequences to the lives of other people and their own loved ones due to one set of policies vs. another.

By your basic logic of who is anyone to put a value on people's lives due to varying risks of X negative thing happening, we could ban a whole pile of things that people need because somewhere, somehow, these things will indeed cause some people to die. I'm not comparing it to the current severity of COVID, but the flue alone kills tens to hundreds of thousands per year. Does this mean that the whole world should be annually locked down against relatively marginal risks?

The economic debate around the costs of quarantine isn't just about modern american values being "corrupt and disgusting", it's a global consideration that I promise you, billions of people are deeply worrying about in many other countries.. I live moving between two different countries that aren't the United States and which both make many cultural efforts to separate their values from those of Americans, and in both of them, the domestic economic question is causing the same enormous worry and resistance to prolonged quarantines that millions of Americans are also worried about..

I mean, what modern specifically american values? Being able to stay economically solvent? No dude, that's worldwide, and especially among vast parts of the population that don't live under a strong social safety net or with the privilege of enough money or work-from-home opportunities to comfortably sit out the pandemic while criticizing others as greedy.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#838

Post by monadic2 » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:57 AM UTC

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…

While I emphatically reject the idea that the above poster has any role in any community anyone would wish to join, I do sincerely appreciate your efforts to moderate and I will avoid personal attacks in the future.

Excepting Walter Bright, that dude's a complete asshole.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#839

Post by lixtra » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:57 AM UTC

skulk wrote: post #825

csomar wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from the TSA for protecting you from terrorists? Or how is this different from the Internet and freedom of speech censorship for protecting you from child porn. Reality Check: It's not different. People should stop from thinking they have a higher moral ground. Nobody does. On the other hand, on a free society, you should not be able to strip people from their freedom, regardless. People should…

> People should be able to decide if they want to die from Coronavirus or live a semi-paralyzed life in fear. If you are that concerned, then you can confine yourself at home until everything is over. The amount of nuance that you refuse to integrate with your worldview is staggering. I'm shocked to see people write comments like this on Hacker News of all places. I know this point has been beaten to death already (w…

> The amount of nuance that you refuse to integrate with your worldview is staggering. I'm shocked to see people write comments like this on Hacker News of all places.

HN asks you to assume a favorable interpretation of the comments. For me it is very clear that the parent meant the whole spectrum, including all nuances by stating the two extremes.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#840

Post by RandomBacon » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 1:59 AM UTC

svnpenn wrote: post #783

eanzenberg wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU has twice the population? Are you including Russia?

Do you not know how to do even the most cursory internet search? > Population 746,419,440 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe > Population 328,239,523 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

EU = European Union

European Union ≠ Europe