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

New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 393 posts

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#311

Post by [deleted] »

staticassertion wrote: post #260
throwaway5752 wrote: post #129

There is no doubt Cuomo should be the national point person for the response to the crisis based on his performance so far. He is independently working with regional manufacturing to retool to make critical medical PPE and ventilators, and has organized a regional coalition including CT, NJ, and PA. I have not agreed with him all the time, but his crisis management has been exemplary and he will have saved many lives…

As far as I can tell he's been way too slow and this is still not a lock down, so I'm unsure why I see so much praise for him. I suspect it's because he did a cutesy interview.

[deleted]

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#312

Post by devy »

leereeves wrote: post #306
devy wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's population density cannot compare to Downstate New York, so there are some advantages to implement social distancing measures in CA than in NY/NYC.

NYC has the highest population density in the US, and yet Cuomo is fighting against stronger measures in NYC proposed by Mayor De Blasio.

It's a difficult decision to be made. On one hand, short term strong measure will guarantee unemployment and bankruptcies and potentially long term economic impact (talk about another the Great Depression). On the other hand, inaction will inevitably cause millions of deaths including young people. It's a chilling effect to see that "the point of no return" date was already past last week for NY. Very very disturbing. I live in NYC metro and has never been so frightened and furious in my life of 40 years, knowing that in a few weeks/months myself, myself, my family or my friends and colleague could potentially die, all due to 2 months of Federal Government's inaction.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#313

Post by henryfjordan »

leereeves wrote: post #308
henryfjordan wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newsom referred to California as a "Nation State" repeatedly in his latest address, which is a great way to tell the Federal Government to pound sand. He took Trump's call for each state to fend for itself seriously. I wouldn't say that he's not fighting with the president. He's been doing a great job though

> He took Trump's call for each state to fend for itself seriously. Is that really fighting with the President? Republicans have a fundamentally different philosophy about disaster management that matches their general philosophy about government. Democrats generally prefer a centralized response, while Republicans want local control. I haven't heard any Republican object to Calfornia acting independently. That's act…

I suppose maybe he hasn't gone as far as "fighting with" the President over coronavirus. They've had "fights" in the past on other issues but you're right in that Newsom was very California-focussed recently.

I think Newsom has realized that the federal government was caught with its pants down and will be useless for the rest of this crisis. He needed to step up and he did. Calling California a "Nation State" was a deliberate way of saying "we're on our own and we should be ready for that". It's a dig at the President but maybe not fighting words. It struck me as surprisingly anti-federalist, states-rights positive thing for a Democrat governor to be saying though. If the leader of a southern state was using those words, I'd be relatively upset (we fought a war over this in the 1800s).

The fighting will no doubt resume when this is all over.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#314

Post by BookmarkSaver »

leereeves wrote: post #308
henryfjordan wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newsom referred to California as a "Nation State" repeatedly in his latest address, which is a great way to tell the Federal Government to pound sand. He took Trump's call for each state to fend for itself seriously. I wouldn't say that he's not fighting with the president. He's been doing a great job though

> He took Trump's call for each state to fend for itself seriously. Is that really fighting with the President? Republicans have a fundamentally different philosophy about disaster management that matches their general philosophy about government. Democrats generally prefer a centralized response, while Republicans want local control. I haven't heard any Republican object to Calfornia acting independently. That's act…

>while Republicans want to not pay for it

Fixed that for you.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#315

Post by codyb »

fiftyfifty wrote: post #261
dyingkneepad wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We get shocked when an airplane with 150-300 people falls: we spend months talking about it. Now we see multiple instances of these numbers daily: two airplanes in Italy, one in Spain, a small one in the US, but it still doesn't feel as terrifying as a real airplane crash to me. I'm not saying I'm denying COVID or that the deaths are not horrible, just that for some unknown reason airplane crashes still seem so much…

The one that bothers me is 9-11, how many trillions of dollars did the US spend after that on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the war against terror? We are likely to see several 9-11s worth of deaths in the US due to Covid-19, will we spend even a fraction of what we spent after 9-11 to be more prepared for the next pandemic?

Considering it’s been less than a month and there are already half trillion dollar plans to help Americans out being proposed, it seems like the answer is probably yes.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#316

Post by Gibbon1 »

ambicapter wrote: post #209
Dirlewanger wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments would love that. Also, don't think things regarding their newfound powers would go "back to normal" either after.

What "newfound" powers? Did they pass any new laws for these powers? Seems like they always had them, so your scenario doesn't make sense.

In the late 19th century New York City used to send people with serious infectious diseases to a Sanitarium. Unless they could afford to be under a doctor/hospitals care. Most didn't come back.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#317

Post by [deleted] »

devy wrote: post #312
leereeves wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NYC has the highest population density in the US, and yet Cuomo is fighting against stronger measures in NYC proposed by Mayor De Blasio.

It's a difficult decision to be made. On one hand, short term strong measure will guarantee unemployment and bankruptcies and potentially long term economic impact (talk about another the Great Depression). On the other hand, inaction will inevitably cause millions of deaths including young people. It's a chilling effect to see that "the point of no return" date was already past last week for NY. Very very disturbing…

[deleted]

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#318

Post by DenisM »

newen wrote: post #77
DenisM wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be better for the state to close the subway and pay for Lyft for all essential workers. Creates jobs for the drivers, gets essential workers where they need to be, closes the major infection channel. The drivers would be required to wear surgical masks and wash the back seat of the car before each passenger.

You expect untrained contract workers to follow procedures like that?

Yes I do, under direct supervision of the next passenger.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#319

Post by ceejayoz »

ransom1538 wrote: post #224
throwaway5752 wrote: post #129

There is no doubt Cuomo should be the national point person for the response to the crisis based on his performance so far. He is independently working with regional manufacturing to retool to make critical medical PPE and ventilators, and has organized a regional coalition including CT, NJ, and PA. I have not agreed with him all the time, but his crisis management has been exemplary and he will have saved many lives…

Sorry what? His state has the highest infection rate and he just NOW did a 100% workforce reduction. He hasn't even issued "a shelter in place" order. BARS WERE OPEN MONDAY. Thousands of deaths will be on his hands. I think he should be criminally prosecuted. NY needs to be locked down NOW .

> His state has the highest infection rate

NY doesn't have the highest infection rate, just the highest raw count.

This likely just reflects the fact that NY is doing a lot more testing than any other state.

Alabama has had roughly 80% of their tests come back positive, and they've only done a little more than a hundred.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testi...

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#320

Post by codyb »

ahoy wrote: post #7
ddoolin wrote: post #2

I'm glad that the favorite son could do the right thing for the state of NY, particularly when their positive cases are exploding.

Cuomo loves half-measures and taking credit for not doing much of anything. There's no force of law behind this order. Earlier this week he announced "mortgage relief," but its means-tested and difficult to actually navigate. It won't help. A year or 2 ago he rolled out his "free college for every new yorker" plan. It benefits about 10% of the population. Cuomo's only skill is talking a big game. He's exactly as bad…

10% of the population of NYS is 2 million people.

It may be falsely advertised if it was claimed as “free college for every New Yorker” but I’m hard pressed to understand why people who support things like tuition free college programs get so angry about steps in that direction.

Even if it’s only 10% of that 2 million people that actually need to go college it’s still 200,000 Americans that are better off than they were before.

And didn’t NY’s legislature not turn blue until November of 2019?

I may be wrong, but if helping hundreds of thousands of low income Americans get access to higher education means your only skill is “talking a big game” and makes you a “bad neolib” I’m not sure that’s a message I can get behind.

I don’t know all of Cuomo’s policies or history, he may indeed be a bad Governor, but I really have trouble understand the people who shit on others for moving us in a positive direction because it’s not 100% of the way there yet.

Post reply on HN