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

Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

jsonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 604 posts

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#381

Post by mehrdadn »

JPKab wrote: post #369
mehrdadn wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So at the risk of asking a dumb question: why aren't protesters demanding e.g. more economic aid instead of a reopening? It's not like giving money to people in this crisis is a taboo anymore... it was one thing both the Congress and the White House agreed on for once. And it's not like if everything reopens then they're going to be instantly back in business. A lot of people will still stay home anyway. Wouldn't it…

Maybe because the protesters don't want handouts from agencies which have done a very poor job dispersing said handouts already. I can go to a superstore which is deemed essential because it sells groceries and buy all sorts of items that specialty stores aren't able to sell me because they're closed. any member of the public can enter these superstores with no screening whatsoever. The small business owners would sc…

I can't tell if you're ranting or just upset at all this or at the fact that HNers commenting are on topics that you feel they're disconnected from (though I'm sorry about your family's situation), but your reply is quite incoherent. I can't reply to every point, but I can't even make sense of the fact that you're calling me out for being so certain that reopening proposal comes with a lot of... uncertainty in giving people their income? Especially compared to just handing them money? So your position is I should be less confident in the uncertainty? Because you yourself are absolutely certain about... the uncertainty? What?

At a high level though: surely you understand not everything is equally uncertain here, and that not everything is being flown blindly? We have like 200 other countries in the world to observe and draw conclusions from, both socioeconomically and medically. We have ourselves to draw conclusions from, given the preceding shutdown and its effects. And we have experts who know and analyze quite a bit more than either you or me being quite united in their opinions. You can't seriously be so confident that their opinions are just coin tosses in a vacuum, come on. Especially not when you're the one preaching uncertainty!

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#382

Post by sulam »

HideousKojima wrote: post #347
2rsf wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Oman ? pop 4.829 million, 4,019 cases with only 17 deaths. Or Belgium that does have quarantine rules but still have more cases of deaths. It's not a game, and we don't fully understand how this works so maybe we should stop comparing.

If we're talking about efficacy of government lockdown policies, universal healthcare, etc., then we absolutely should compare. And a cursory glance at the data suggests that government lockdown policies have minimal effect on the spread of the virus, there seems to be little to no correlation between severity of lockdown and cases/deaths

That’s a really weird conclusion to draw looking at what’s happened globally and in local pockets. Look at Singapore and South Korea — full lockdown and great control, and then outbreaks in places where the lockdown put people in close quarters (immigrant labor in Singapore) orwhen restrictions were lifted (bars in South Korea). Look at Wuhan itself, where it took time to establish a lockdown and contact tracing, then they got control of the situation and had better outcomes, then a secondary wave once they lifted restrictions. Look at Italy, where the lockdown means Northern Italy has had a very different experience from the rest of the country. Sweden has had a mostly voluntary lockdown and high death rates compared to the rest of Europe and other very similar countries (Norway, Denmark, Finland) have had stricter lockdowns and better numbers.

Also let’s look at the fundamentals. This virus is spread through contact with viral laden particles, either in an aerosol or on a surface. It is obvious that to get the disease you need to come into contact with the virus. Limit contacts and you limit exposure, this is so basic I hesitate to call it science.

You have a tough row to hoe if you’re going to try and prove no correlation between lockdowns and cases.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#383

Post by [deleted] »

ericmay wrote: post #367
ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps the wording is a bit harsh - not everywhere is a cesspool, a lot of places have bounced back, but the rust belt is particularly bad in area of opioid abuse - that is fact and very accurate. https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-summari...

I can find a bunch of articles summarizing the West Coast as a cesspool of heroin, homelessness, and opioid use as well. https://www.city-journal.org/opiods-homelessness-west-coast https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-c... https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-12-26/... Maybe California is a cesspool too? https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/as-opioid-ep... Or maybe Se…

[deleted]

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#384

Post by aw1621107 »

hanging wrote: post #213
light_hue_1 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything about the comment above is totally incorrect when it comes to the law in the US. Just to give you a taste of how wrong this is: the case isn't even about an executive order by a governor! It's about the rulemaking of the Secretary of the Department of Health Services. Not only is the parent wrong, the opinion actually goes out of it's way in the first paragraph to say this! "This case is not about Governor…

executive orders can decide what the law means You should tell the SCOTUS that. They overturned 55% of Obama executive directives that reached them, and his administration had the most overturned unanimously (yes, even Ginsberg and Sotomayor) of any Presidency. >>Also, the U.S. Constitution's requirement that State governments be (small-r) republican There is no such requirement Dude. This is literally in Article IV:…

> Dude. This is literally in Article IV:

> "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, ..."

Perhaps it’s my imperfect understanding of English here, but to me this reads more like a guarantee to the states that the federal government itself will take the form of a republican government, not that the states themselves must be republics.

It’s like a shopkeeper saying “My store shall guarantee to every shopper prices that are no higher than that of a competitor’s.” The guarantee is on the shopkeeper’s part; no obligation is required of the shoppers themselves.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#385

Post by sulam »

101404 wrote: post #299
dtwest wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden has 342 COVID deaths per million. The US has 254 deaths per million. Germany is doing better, but the rest of Western Europe has much higher rates of death than the US. There seems to be a myth going around that Europe is handling this better than the US and the statistics don't really support that claim. If you have to bash Golden Corral to make your claim, you're probably a bit biased against Americans. That…

Yep. But Sweden is run by an ultra leftist government, so if course it is not criticised. But the same lies about "the US is doing worse" are told here in Europe as well. Just need to look to the stats, do the sum, and suddenly the US and EU are about the same. Oh well, modern journalism is about clicks, not facts, unfortunately.

I have absolutely read articles, in the NY Times, comparing Sweden’s approach to other countries. Initially they were positive and then they turned negative when the death rates started climbing.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#386

Post by TeMPOraL »

xienze wrote: post #316
CathedralBorrow wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There seems to be a myth going around that Europe is handling this better than the US and the statistics don't really support that claim. Do you mind showing your work? What do the statistics say about Europe vs. US? I see you mentioned Sweden and Germany but Europe has many more countries than those two.

> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ Sort by deaths/1M. You’ll see the US doing better than UK, France, Belgium, Spain, Italy, etc. And in absolute terms, there’s still more cases and deaths in Europe as a whole (I find it funny that when it comes to GDP, we like to think of Europe as “United States of Europe”, but when talking about corona deaths, not so much).

You have to take into account that Europe is much more densely and uniformly populated than the United States, and had outbreaks start earlier than the US.

WRT. "United States of Europe", thanks to the EU, you can often consider the Union as a unit in terms of trade; Europe is also more homogenous culturarly than the states. However, when talking about COVID-19, EU has almost zero influence on how the pandemic is handled (somewhat by design, definitely by vote); it's only meaningful to talk about individual nations, with their own healthcare systems, their own emergency policies, and their own sovereign, locked down borders.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#387

Post by bagacrap »

wonderwonder wrote: post #357

The way the United States has handled this has been awe inspiring in its incompetence. We had our first identified case on the same day as S. Korea. Our death rate is currently 254 / million vs S. Korea's rate of 5. Our federal leadership is saying that we should both open up and not open up at the same time. Its encouraging protesters that are protesting for the disobedience of the guidelines that it released. We re…

actually people are sitting at home getting paid more to sit than they were to work, and the government is not getting paid --- it's losing massive tax revenue.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#388

Post by Press2forEN »

mehrdadn wrote: post #346
rubidium wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people I’ve talked to pushing for government to reopen things have lost jobs and businesses... or are about to. Their basic survival needs are being threatened. Show a little more compassion. I recommend talking to some people instead of parroting the pictures you see in the news.

So at the risk of asking a dumb question: why aren't protesters demanding e.g. more economic aid instead of a reopening? It's not like giving money to people in this crisis is a taboo anymore... it was one thing both the Congress and the White House agreed on for once. And it's not like if everything reopens then they're going to be instantly back in business. A lot of people will still stay home anyway. Wouldn't it…

This goes back to the culture point OP made. Many people in the US want to earn a living, not be provided a living.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#389

Post by apostacy »

mehrdadn wrote: post #381
JPKab wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because the protesters don't want handouts from agencies which have done a very poor job dispersing said handouts already. I can go to a superstore which is deemed essential because it sells groceries and buy all sorts of items that specialty stores aren't able to sell me because they're closed. any member of the public can enter these superstores with no screening whatsoever. The small business owners would sc…

I can't tell if you're ranting or just upset at all this or at the fact that HNers commenting are on topics that you feel they're disconnected from (though I'm sorry about your family's situation), but your reply is quite incoherent. I can't reply to every point, but I can't even make sense of the fact that you're calling me out for being so certain that reopening proposal comes with a lot of... un certainty in givin…

The cost of the shelter in place order is doing more harm than good. When the dust settles, I am convinced that more people will have died as a result.

I'm on pretty solid ground here. The costs of poverty and economic collapse are arguably better researched than pandemics.

And it is hard not to be disgusted by the attitude of many people on HN, who are least affected by this.

Having some relatives in that part of the country, I would compare this to the dust bowl. A complete economic collapse that will over the next year require millions of people to flee to cities, as they have absolutely nothing left. What are people supposed to do when every single business has gone from their town?

But people here like to sneer at these "stupid rednecks" that are clearly not as smart as us, right?

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#390

Post by dilandau »

mchusma wrote: post #95

“If a forest fire breaks out, there is no time for debate. Action is needed. The governor could declare an emergency and respond accordingly. But in the case of a pandemic, which lasts month after month, the governor cannot rely on emergency powers indefinitely,” Roggensack wrote for the majority. Refreshing to see some pressure for democracy to resume.

I'm hopeful that more states will follow this lead. At the outset the shutdowns have undoubtedly helped prevent a massive tide of sickness that would have overwhelmed the healthcare system. Let's not forget that this was always the point of the shutdowns. It was never about preventing people from getting sick at some point -- it was about limiting a crush of sick people all at once.

As Powell said yesterday, 40% of households making $40K or less lost their jobs in March. This is crushing those most vulnerable, economically.

Post reply on HN