671–680 of 893 posts
I hate how the idea of reopening has split down political party lines. This is definitely not the time for partisanship. Now that Republicans have come out as pro-reopening, San Francisco will be the last city to reopen in the country. 0 COVID-19 infections will be too many.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which ones, other than SK the other good example (japan, china, singapore) all turned out to not be testing.
Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan. Well, not completely eliminated, but it will be eliminated soon enough based on current trends.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's also the goal of slowing down and stalling in hopes of getting a vaccine, better treatments, production to catch up with supply shortages for healthcare facilities, and allowing healthcare facilities to increase capacity, etc.
Barring a miracle, mass production of a vaccine is at least 9 months away. Likely more like a year+ There's no better treatments coming. We've been fighting viral pneumonia since the dawn of medicine and the tool kit is pretty sparse. Finding anything nearing a cure or even a 20% improvement is wishful thinking. Our health care capacity is adequate. NYC got to ~30% infected and while I'm sure none of the medical work…
The comment you are replying to should have also mentioned greatly increased testing capacity as well as contact-tracing. Extending the lockdown allows us to build up this infrastructure so that restrictions can be reduced while still preventing exponential spread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
State and local governments have far greater abilities to issue orders like this than the federal government. What, exactly, is unconstitutional about a city issuing an order that revokes the ability of a business to operate due to a health emergency?
On the surface there's not much constitutional protection for engaging in business but there would be some serious schadenfreude if Wickard v. Filburn showed up to defend individuals from state prosecution for once. edit: To expand on this, for an individual's right to do something to be protected from the states that right must be protected under the 14th amendment. Over the years the court has found that the 1st, 2…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right. Another issue is the age divide. Younger people: harder hit economically, less so by the virus; older people: harder hit by the virus, less so economically. This can only worsen the class fissure which had already developed along generational lines.
Median age of death is well over 70 years of age. It's obvious who this virus strikes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why "We're in this together" is just not true. Oprah has it better than me right now. But we both have it way better than my hairdresser (who knows if her salon will survive). And all three of us have it better than a Silicon Valley janitor. I'm filled every day with deep, deep sadness for everyone whose refrigerators are running out with their bank account at zero.
"We're all in this together" is more of an aspirational phrase, meant to motivate the better-off to contribute. When it doesn't work, the people who aren't better off will of course be reminded every time they hear it that the system is failing them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What bothers me is the contention that my rights are contingent upon reported capacity of already existing hospitals This is pretty selfish. What about all of the old and immunocompromised people that could _die_? What about the families of those people? These people deserve rights too and I’d say their right to _stay alive_ trumps your “right” to get a hair cut or whatever
Let the old and immuno-compromised shelter in place then while the rest of us build herd immunity. We don't shut down the tobacco or alcohol industry even though second hand smoke and DUIs kill orders of magnitude more innocents than covid-19 ever will. Millions of people die every year. That's never going to change - such is life. You gotta draw a line somewhere and I think the "save lives at all costs, even the cos…
I hate how the idea of reopening has split down political party lines. This is definitely not the time for partisanship. Now that Republicans have come out as pro-reopening, San Francisco will be the last city to reopen in the country. 0 COVID-19 infections will be too many.
Its disappointing that you bemoan the partisan politics in a time like this and immediately assume/mock that San Francisco will take a partisan decision when so far they have done a good job and stuck to science.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My friend who works at the airport in the Galapagos (GPS) was telling me that no one has gotten paid since the tourism stopped. Luckily she can work on farm, but many can't. The local animal shelter there is now out of food, and the dogs will starve if they don't somehow raise money in the next 3 days or so (@patitasgalapaguenas on instagram, you can donate here [0]). The US is struggling in many ways, but I can't he…
I'm gonna be that guy... given that people are starving, isn't immoral to ask that money be donated to keep shelter dogs alive? Surely they should just be put to sleep, no?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can point to something about the situation that has changed since the shelter-in-place was initiated that would indicate it's not needed anymore, I'd love to hear it. The virus hasn't gone away, we don't have any medications to make it reliably recoverable, we don't have test + trace ability in place (anecdotally, even if you're symptomatic but not in seriously bad condition it's still very difficult to get te…
I agree that opening up in a dumb way would let the virus rip through the population. But we now know that surface transmission isn't as big a deal, and that spreading is much less likely when there isn't sustained contact. We also now have everyone wearing masks. Given those things, I would think that any shop where you ordinarily go in for five or ten minutes and don't touch a bunch of things (shoe repair, sporting…