immunity or not, a lot of people are going to stop caring about it altogether
Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
361–370 of 381 posts
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m sorry that you haven’t followed the topic carefully but it’s hardly a logical fallacy to say that not doing what epidemiologists recommended doesn’t mean following their advice wouldn’t have worked, especially when you can look at countries like Australia which did a harder lockdown and have seen the predicted benefits.
So in that case, you're willing to say that under current conditions in the US, mask wearing and restrictions on things like dining are pointless, right? If "lockdown" can only be expected to produce results in its strongest form and we can't do that, that seems like the logical conclusion.
Not pointless. It we obviously aren’t in “lockdown”. Go to a restaurant and you’ll see dozens of people eating indoors without masks on.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comment above is a little mean, but I don't think it's ad hominem to note the author's lack of specific qualification in epidemiology or infectious disease. When I am a non-expert in a complicated subject, I want the advice of experts. When I go to my general practitioner, I want to know they have a certificate that says they went to medical school. When I need open-heart surgery, I want to know the doctor is a c…
> I don't think it's ad hominem to note the author's lack of specific qualification in epidemiology or infectious disease If the purpose of such a note is to attack the validity of the author's position, this is what ad hominem means.
In pure deductive logic, sure. But nobody operates like that. Bayesian reasoning allows us to decide to listen to one group of people and ignore another based on our priors even if it isn’t purely valid deductive logic.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty weird actually. The news desk for the WSJ is among the best out there. Their news stories tend to be really dry in a good way - full of facts and figures, with very little in the way of click bait hyperbole. Their subscriber model is all about business people who want the details and not opinion... Which then makes the opinion desk at the WSJ a real oddball. It's consistently right-leaning, sometimes to t…
The weirdest part is this leads to frequent items where the Op-Ed page makes factual claims that are directly contradicted by the news section in the same issue.
This isn't particularly unusual. The opinion section is a fine place for dissenting views. Consider a news article covering the abuse of elderly in a nursing home, with an opinion piece defending (or explaining, or whatever) the nursing home - this could be good.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
The weirdest part is this leads to frequent items where the Op-Ed page makes factual claims that are directly contradicted by the news section in the same issue.
This isn't particularly unusual. The opinion section is a fine place for dissenting views. Consider a news article covering the abuse of elderly in a nursing home, with an opinion piece defending (or explaining, or whatever) the nursing home - this could be good.
There's a difference between explaining and defending the abuse the news-side reported, and saying that the abuse never happened and the news side is wrong/lying/etc.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps, but meanwhile we're forcibly closing certain businesses and hurting those. I would know, I own one that has been greatly affected (a bar). For reference, my customers starting hanging out at the strip club instead, which didn't have the restrictions imposed (it was based on liquor licenses, which they don't have in my state). So, the lockdown was ineffective at controlling the population or spread, but it st…
Are you responding to the wrong post, here? I don't recall denying that this lockdown has been disastrous for many businesses. You typed that out as if you were disagreeing or offering a counterpoint. Is anybody on Earth even denying the impact this has had on businesses? I work in the restaurant industry, FWIW. Nobody needs to tell me how disastrous this has been for certain businesses. More importantly than my post…
Seconding your point: I think hard lockdowns are the only way to halt spread prior to mass vaccination and that’s devastating for businesses if we don’t do anything to help make up lost pay for workers, assist businesses with rent, etc. In some cases you might be able to soften it – pay restaurants to make delivery meal packs for high-risk people, etc. – but something like a bar, movie theater, mall retail shop, etc. in most cities probably doesn’t have an option to pay their rent in most areas without close to normal levels of customer traffic even if most of their staff are laid off.
It’d be expensive but other parts of the economy are booming and one point of having things like government debt is recognizing that it helps smooth the impact of disasters. We should be doing a WWII victory bond campaign investing in local businesses.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we do have is proof that increased gatherings lead to increased transmission. We have, I think, a pretty reasonable assumption that holidays lead to increased gatherings. So, a cautious assumption until data shows it's not accurate that "holidays lead to increased transmission" seems to me to be warranted. Have you seen data that shows holidays don't lead to increased transmission?
> a pretty reasonable assumption that holidays lead to increased gatherings Not necessarily. They also removed one big set of gatherings: Work. Workplaces and the commute to them are massive contributors. Many people are in (loose) contact with many more people at work than at a large Thanksgiving dinner, and contact tracing is a lot more effective for the Thanksgiving dinner (everyone there is a close contact) vs. w…
I think that's a totally fair point, and a reason that assumption might be incorrect.
To be clear I don't mean "a pretty reasonable assumption" to mean it was exceptionally likely to be true (with, say 95% confidence) in my mind in this it's more like a 65% chance of being true.
I guess I was using it as shorthand for "my prior is >50%"
Anyway, I wouldn't be shocked if that assumption was wrong and if it is, it makes sense that it'd be for the reasons you outline
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#368Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps, but meanwhile we're forcibly closing certain businesses and hurting those. I would know, I own one that has been greatly affected (a bar). For reference, my customers starting hanging out at the strip club instead, which didn't have the restrictions imposed (it was based on liquor licenses, which they don't have in my state). So, the lockdown was ineffective at controlling the population or spread, but it st…
Are you responding to the wrong post, here? I don't recall denying that this lockdown has been disastrous for many businesses. You typed that out as if you were disagreeing or offering a counterpoint. Is anybody on Earth even denying the impact this has had on businesses? I work in the restaurant industry, FWIW. Nobody needs to tell me how disastrous this has been for certain businesses. More importantly than my post…
Thanks for the well-wishes. We've been established a long time (about to celebrate 11 years) and I am very financially conservative, so the business had enough capital to go multiple years if we were closed down (no payroll, minimal utilities) and still re-open.
We've sporadically been able to open normal hours, reduced hours, reduced capacity, and all kinds of other restricted levels of activity, which has resulted in terrible sales, but smaller losses than we would normally have.
It truly is a very small business (9 employees) so its operational cost is pretty low.
I pointed out the strip clubs, but of course the casinos are allowed to continue operation as well. They avoided literally all of the regulations we had to obey: capacity, forced social distancing, reduced hours, etc. And of course they don't have the taboo aspect that some people feel with strip clubs, so they've been nice and busy. I have to imagine they're lining the governor's pockets to enjoy such a privileged status.
Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
He’s either correct about your tire pressure or he’s not. You’re right about that part. That’s as far as the purely logical bit can go—then you get to economics: Should you spend the time and energy to give his claim credence? Your example is poor because tire pressure is an expertise the average person you’re likely to come into contact with likely possesses. This is not so of, say, the epidemiological issue in ques…
Yes, I attempted to cover that eventuality in my example. Let's say I am not qualified to examine the tire myself and someone who's ability I also doubted made an observation. Here's what I wouldn't do: prejudicially dismiss the tribesman's opinion, citing his lack of authority on the topic. Even if we accept the premises of an appeal to authority, it would follow that one would have to also be an authority on the to…
> Here's what I wouldn't do: prejudicially dismiss the tribesman's opinion, citing his lack of authority on the topic.
Even if you wouldn't in this particular case, you can't possibly function in the world if you eschew questions of trust completely. You'd basically have to prove everything yourself.
> Even if we accept the premises of an appeal to authority...
An appeal to authority is claiming something is true because an authority said it. The inverse of that would be that something is untrue because no authority said it. No one is claiming that to be the case and even if they were, that wouldn't make it an appeal to authority. In any case, this is a question of credibility (i.e., trust).
> ...it would follow that one would have to also be an authority on the topic before he could determine the authoritativeness of another speaker.
This doesn't follow at all. I am not an expert on tires, but I can understand that someone who has never even seen a tire is also not an expert on tires.
> Even if you are an authority, does this status render you infallible?
No. Of course not. But it does make you a more credible source of information in your field of expertise.