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

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#481

Post by rs999gti »

dredmorbius wrote: post #350
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…

Proper authorities, photo of car, and a set of local news organisations, plus a few tweets and your state reps, might get some attention. Play interests off each other.

> Proper authorities, photo of car, and a set of local news organisations, plus a few tweets and your state reps, might get some attention. > Play interests off each other.

Papers please!

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#482

Post by Alupis »

ceejayoz wrote: post #477
Alupis wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Keep your distance, wear a mask, and stick to small groups" is not the same as "do not socialize". Ok, but then we have people doing solo activities, all by themselves, minding their own business -- getting arrested by lunatics[1] because we said no beach allowed during Covid[2]! How do we reconcile that? [1] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-03/paddle-b... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpsaSf…

> April 3, 2020 You'll find California (and everywhere else) has loosened up substantially on outdoor activities, as we have substantially more information in recent months on outdoor versus indoor transmission. We've learned a lot since April about COVID-19.

Even during the height of beach-chasing in the LA area, it was well known being outdoors was far safer than being stuck indoors.

It wasn't about safety. Arresting a lone surfer or lone beach jogger isn't about safety. It's about compliance. You must comply.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#483

Post by nradov »

briffle wrote: post #394
jdhn wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm tired of hearing about "the new normal". This is NOT normal, and the weak attempts to make it normal is just disgusting. Like you said, this isn't as deadly as people first thought it was, but it seems that those in charge don't want to admit that they're wrong, and as a result everybody is suffering from this even if they really wouldn't suffer from COVID.

When the virus hit China, it had around a 4% death rate. Now, in the US, we have 5.6M confirmed cases, and 175k deaths. That is 3% death rate. (although, deaths lag behind diagnosis) You're right, its less than they first feared, but not much. And still 30 times the death rate of the flu. There have been some groups that keep looking at the number of deaths, and compare it to the population as a whole, to make the nu…

The actual best estimate of death rate in the US is 0.65%, not 3%.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#484

Post by alistairSH »

recursive wrote: post #451
alistairSH wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...We are now on month 7... And if people had actually sheltered in place back in March, we might be opening back up (or opening with fewer COVID clusters).

I don't understand this. Under what circumstances are you proposing that we'd be able to open back up? What's different now (or could have been) than it was when you claim we should be been locking down the first time? Certainly no amount of locking down would completely eradicate the virus, so what's the exit strategy?

I don't disagree with phased lockdown -> re-opening plans similar to what we did here in VA. The lockdown started in late March, round one of opening was rural areas and small gatherings, then extending to suburban areas, etc. And if numbers start to go back up, we might shut down again.

The problem I do have is a substantial number of people appear to be ignoring any/all orders to stay home, distance, etc. Everything from the speakeasy gyms mentioned in the article to churches holding indoor services to in-person classes at local schools. All three of which, by most accounts, are likely to result in new COVID clusters.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#485

Post by treis »

aflag wrote: post #457
bazzert wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> We're approaching the total death toll of World War II[3]. assuming you mean the US death toll also bear in mind the median age of WW II casualties was something like 26; while the median age for covid victims is 75+. Not to diminish the latter but they are very different.

Not sure if I follow your point? Are you saying this is less of a tragety because these people lived 50 years longer?

Is it not? To me, an 18 year old getting mown down on a beach is a much larger tragedy than an 85 year old dying.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#486

Post by throwawaygh »

JoshuaDavid wrote: post #466
cowpig wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's pretty rational for someone to understand that and make personal choices... No, it's not; it's arrogant. All of the epidemiologists and experts seem to think otherwise. What do you know that they don't? So far 172,000 people have died in the US due to Coronavirus, directly[1]. The actual number of people who have died, if you factor in the effect of the virus on infrastructure and missed diagnoses is about dou…

> We're approaching the total death toll of World War II[3]. We're really not though. World War II killed somewhere in the ballpark of 75 million people. COVID-19 has a bit under 800,000 known deaths. Even if we say that for every person who is known to have died of covid, 5 additional people died and were recorded as deaths from other causes (and it's not that high, you can check the excess mortality stats to confir…

I think he meant US deaths because his source is a list of WWII deaths by country. That is actually fairly accurate: 170K direct, he assumes ~2x if you count indirect, so ~400K which is indeed approaching total US WWII casualities (460K or so).

Even if you don't count or differently count indirect deaths, I'd still say going from 0 to 170K in 6 months with no end in sight definitely constitutes "approaching". We'll get there before this is all over, for sure.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#487

Post by deadmetheny »

juliansimioni wrote: post #130
ReptileMan wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It matters of course how many of how many are reporting that? 1/2 not worth it. 1/1000 - will take my chances. Covid seems to have flipped a switch in people's brains that make every probability 1.

I wouldn't take the 1/1000 chance, but even then. It's not an all or nothing choice. It's more like: - X/1000 chance for people who go to the gym, get sick, lose health permanently, probably infect others - 0/1000 chance of the same if you stay away from the gym and try to do some sort of similar workout at home, even if it's not ideal. Body weight exercises are great by the way Who cares if X is 1 or 999? Why would…

If I'm squatting 250 lbs normally, body weight isn't going to do jack for me.

People choose the first option because they weigh risks differently. The risk of permanent health damage as a result of coronavirus disease in my age bracket with no pre-existing conditions is effectively nil.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#488

Post by nradov »

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…

What specific long-term gain will we achieve with that short-term sacrifice? Sure we can keep most gyms closed for several more months, and that might marginally reduce the spread of the virus for a while. But the virus is now endemic and will be with us essentially forever. We have to reopen gyms eventually, and then we'll be right back where we started. As long as the curve has been flattened sufficiently and the healthcare system isn't overwhelmed then what are we really accomplishing by waiting?

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#489

Post by treeman79 »

bazzert wrote: post #443
cowpig wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does your figure include people who couldn't get medical attention because the health system is completely overwhelmed? Is it possible there are other issues you're not aware of, and that the people who spend their lives studying and preparing for these situations are?

the health system was never "overwhelmed" except for brief periods and in specific locales. My spouse is in healthcare, they have still not recovered their normal census. If anything there will be a huge spike in cancer deaths due to late diagnosis etc as people have stayed away.

So your saying that people are dying from cancer due to covid?

So it’s fair to attribute those deaths to covid then.

     -sarcasm

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#490

Post by creaghpatr »

bosie wrote: post #461
polote wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then lets lockdown and force people who are less healthy to take all the steps to protect themselves, and leave alone the healty ones ?

How do you define 'less healthy' though? In the UK the warning was BMI of over 35 needs to be careful, >40 needs to isolate. That would be a hell of a lot of americans. Plus the diabetics, heart issues, elderly etc.

Not as many as all of them, though.
Post reply on HN