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

Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 96 posts

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#81

Post by BuckRogers »

logicchains wrote: post #73
lmeyerov wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't about you, especially if you're healthy and below 50. I do care about the people you'll help infect, including my wife who works in a hospital, the elderly in my home, my colleagues, my elderly parents, and plenty of other people I care about. I and others should absolutely go to bat for the health of their loved ones and dependents. It's disappointing technologists interested in building things doesn't get…

What about the people you care about who lose their jobs, get evicted, lose the businesses they spent years to build, suffer the permanent long-term effects of impoverishment (even temporary periods of unexpected unemployment still have a lasting negative effect on health outcomes)? Or maybe you're in the upper middle class, like most readers here, and don't know what life's like for the restaurant workers, hairdress…

Without locking down the community early they’ll lose their livelihoods anyway. You can’t create a holocaust and expect there to be no forced shutdown.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#82

Post by generalpass »

It will cost Tesla less money to fight the quarantine order than to shut down production.

Odds are Tesla wins in court and the authorities also know this, so won't actually do anything because they don't want the precedent.

I'm not clear on how the Sheriff can act without a warrant or something, but sure he can tweet.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#83

Post by lmeyerov »

logicchains wrote: post #73
lmeyerov wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't about you, especially if you're healthy and below 50. I do care about the people you'll help infect, including my wife who works in a hospital, the elderly in my home, my colleagues, my elderly parents, and plenty of other people I care about. I and others should absolutely go to bat for the health of their loved ones and dependents. It's disappointing technologists interested in building things doesn't get…

What about the people you care about who lose their jobs, get evicted, lose the businesses they spent years to build, suffer the permanent long-term effects of impoverishment (even temporary periods of unexpected unemployment still have a lasting negative effect on health outcomes)? Or maybe you're in the upper middle class, like most readers here, and don't know what life's like for the restaurant workers, hairdress…

I'll ignore the suggested ad hominem (which was pretty off the mark.)

1. You've got it flipped. I'm totally for everyone slowing down, some more than others, in exchange for saving lives. Most of the jobs going away will be back soon after - people will eat out again etc - so that is not much in the longview compared to family members needlessly dying. There are fragile companies going bust -- for example, in the bay area, restaurants need to perform well to survive, so this accelerated the death of a few already. For most small businesses, a slow downs for a few weeks isn't that bad or uncoverable by emergency loans... unless you were already doomed. There'll be all sorts of other effects, like many VC-fueled co's not being able to use the sales/marketing $ injection to artificially increase q2 growth as much, but no tears here.

2. Fed gov can & should be doing more than giving money to oil companies to temper indiv + SMB effects of the freeze. The continued shitty federal gov response here has meant random rushed local county decisions. In contrast, other nations have mandated things like rent pauses as part of their enforcement. I've worked where a lot of business is effectively barter - there's surprising slack in the US business world with landlords and other obligations in practice. That's not guaranteed, and megacorps, banks, and some individuals (I'm guessing like those on this thread advocating breaking the community isolation) can be inhumane, so important for strong govs to address. Not too late, and you'd be surprised.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#84

Post by kragen »

Cogito wrote: post #47
Barrin92 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The flu does not overrun an entire country's hospital system like COVID-19 has done to Italy. to be fair it certainly can and does. The 2017/2018 influenza pandemic was probably the worst one in a decade, with 35 million infections, 700 000 hospitalizations and 60k deaths, and people for a while were treated in tents and a state of emergency was declared in Alabama, and Southern California and Texas had to turn away…

Thanks, those are good examples I hadn't heard of. From the descriptions there and coming out of Italy it should be clear that COVID-19 is much worse than the worst flu we've seen in a decade. The only thing keeping deaths low to this point is that it isn't as widespread.

It seems comparable to the 1918 Spanish flu, which started in Kansas, except that so far it kills old people almost exclusively, not children or people in their prime. Hopefully it won't mutate.

Nevertheless, it's not a flu.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#85

Post by kragen »

ghastmaster wrote: post #27
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until covid-19 has petered out, the comparisons aren't valid. We're not even sure yet where on the upslope of infections we are. It's way too early to compare it the annual rate of anything else.

It's literally just information. I'm comparing current data, which is clearly indicated and sourced.

There is no possible way that you could believe that your interpretation of this data is correct; you're clearly just trolling, but in a way that is likely to get people killed. You're doing the equivalent of SWATting somebody — also "just trolling" until the guns start going off.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#86

Post by logicchains »

jlokier wrote: post #78
logicchains wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the people you care about who lose their jobs, get evicted, lose the businesses they spent years to build, suffer the permanent long-term effects of impoverishment (even temporary periods of unexpected unemployment still have a lasting negative effect on health outcomes)? Or maybe you're in the upper middle class, like most readers here, and don't know what life's like for the restaurant workers, hairdress…

The older generation is not one homegeneous group. There are a lot of impoverished older generation people. No cash, no house or no liquidity, tiny pension if that. Those people are seriously at risk, and there is nothing they could have done for younger people along the lines you have described. Do we treat the impoverished old like their lives don't matter as much, let them die because they happen to be in the same…

>Do we treat the impoverished old like their lives don't matter as much, let them die because they happen to be in the same arbitrary statistical grouping as other, unrelated old people you feel could have sacrificed more?

Something used in public policy is Quality Adjusted Life Years. An 80 years has a much smaller expected lifespan than a 10 year old, so something that reduces the 80 year old's expected lifespan by e.g. 2 years could be compared to the effect that poverty or environmental damage has on the 70+ expected years of the 10 year old's life.

>Some of those are children, some young, more middle-aged, and most old, although we are currently not sure how the statistics pan out for middle-aged and below when hospitals are severely overrun.

We have this from the Wuhan numbers, where hospital beds were completely insufficient at least for the first month.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#87

Post by [deleted] »

yongjik wrote: post #64
_ea1k wrote: post #9

To be fair to Tesla, they are much less likely to spread the virus than some of the "essential" services that are allowed to remain open. To be fair to the county, finding that perfect balance of what is essential and what is not is impossible. I can't blame them for coming down on this side of things.

> they are much less likely to spread the virus than some of the "essential" services that are allowed to remain open. That's not really relevant, because these essential services are open because they are, well, "essential", not because they are safer. A hospital is the most dangerous place to catch the virus now, but nobody suggests shutting down the hospital, because we need it right now. We don't need a new car n…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#88

Post by bluGill »

justapassenger wrote: post #60
bluGill wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some are shutting down. Tesla is different because all their cars are ordered by someone and so shutting down impacts customers. Others are just building for market and since people are not buying now they are more interested in shutting down production because it just builds up inventory that they need to sell (often meaning a sale). I'm not going to comment on if they should shut down. With the right provision it i…

Tesla stopped building cars to order long time ago. They do keep inventory like anyone else. Smaller than others but still.

If you are correct I stand corrected.

Re: Tesla is not essential business as defined in the Alameda County Health Order

#90

Post by gentleman11 »

bluGill wrote: post #45
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla's Fremont factory employs 10k people. I imagine they work closely together, touch a lot of the same stuff, would be at high risk of transmitting this, but I really have no idea. This would almost certainly lead to 1-10+ deaths -- his workers directly or people infected by them. It would lead to hundreds of not thousands of cases of pneumonia and permanent lung damage. It could easily cost millions of dollars to…

Do they? I work at a factory and those doing production are in small teams (6 max, and your team is assigned for the duration of this crisis) that have it easy to never contact the next (except lunchtime and those of us with a desk are required to eat at our desks to give them more room - I'm working from home which is better yet) modern factories have most of the work done by robots, so it is easy to keep a robot be…

Are there individual break rooms, or change rooms, or kitchens? No work requiring a small group?
Post reply on HN