Personally I think that recreational baseball game attendance should be ended. From what I saw on the news today the people in stupidville are about to have a massive increase in cases of the covid. But, ‘yeah freedumb!’
Printable View
Personally I think that recreational baseball game attendance should be ended. From what I saw on the news today the people in stupidville are about to have a massive increase in cases of the covid. But, ‘yeah freedumb!’
Don't be too shocked - with all these variants afoot I'd agree that recreational air travel needs to cease for a bit. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by Tradd
The Cards are opening with a third of their seats being sold for social distancing, no vendor sales, and other precautions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
This in an outdoor venue.
Seems reasonable to me.
The Cubs and White Sox are doing the same. Not sure about the Sox, but the Cubs are doing no contact vendor sales. People are assigned specific gates.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Meanwhile, in stupidville, they had a full house. And from what I saw on the teevee news maybe a third were wearing masks. But since everything is supposedly bigger in Texas I guess they might as well make the fourth wave of covid bigger as well. The ****ing stupidity is impressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
https://news.google.com/articles/CAI...S&ceid=US%3Aen
Texas and Florida seem to be vying for worst possible response to this pandemic.
Jp, they could have done baseball the smart way like others are planning. It’s a shame.
People keep pushing that scolding narrative, but are those states substantially worse off in real-world numbers than the ones who imposed more draconian lockdowns?Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
The "draconian" lockdowns seldom were. They no more exist than the Easter bunny. I sat here in California appalled at the continuing opening of stuff. I literally watched the hospitals get overwhelmed (they failed the lowest possible bar: flatten the curve enough to preserve hospital capacity), as they didn't shut down stuff because of xmas shopping and they had to get black friday in too.
They will lie to us of course and say "well who could have known hospitals would have been overwhelmed", while claiming to work from models on diseases spread and prediction. But I suspect their models weren't really THAT bad, they just let it happen. I mean someone should investigate, how did it happen, were the models really that off or was it a choice? It did not help of course that we had mini rebellions going on with sheriffs refusing to enforce lockdown as well. Tell me does that on the ground reality ever figure into the mythical "draconian" lockdowns that were supposedly happening?
Now states differed in a lot of features. Those that were hit early when we had no idea how to treat this thing had high death tolls. Some places have problems with overcrowding etc.. But almost nowhere did anyone do draconian lockdowns, certainly not in California.
They try but the reality is that north and South Dakota win the award. Part of the problem for Florida’s efforts is that they export a lot of their success at spreading the disease to other states who get to count the case numbers and deaths as their own wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
Sam Francisco county - 588 deaths per million residentsQuote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
Dallas county - 1478 deaths per million residents
Miami dade county - 2183 deaths per million.
King county Washington - 657 deaths per million.
If you really want to see what it looks like if no safety measures were taken pick a state like Kansas and look at most of the small county numbers. Gove county, population 2600 had 22 deaths for an eye popping 8,321 death rate per million.
I find it fascinating that doubters never do their own research, they just doubt. Very kind of you to find data that you've reviewed before to show that you aren't just talking off the cuff. 'Tis getting very old.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Los Angeles county, 2,334 deaths per million. Wow does that surpass Maimi dade? Of course it does. MASSIVE FAIL.Quote:
Sam Francisco county - 588 deaths per million residents
Dallas county - 1478 deaths per million residents
Miami dade county - 2183 deaths per million.
King county Washington - 657 deaths per million.
But team red and team blue frontal lobotomy, pick a cherry, is it a red cherry or a blue cherry? Governor Newsom FAILED, our local leaders FAILED, and ultimately because of that the hospital system FAILED. :( And I don't care if they all lose their jobs because of it, heads gotta roll. Noone responsible should be in office.
In order of increasing deaths:
San Francisco county - 588 deaths per million (per capital income 139-140k)
King county Washington - 657 deaths per million (per capita income 94-95k)
Dallas county - 1478 deaths per million residents (per capita income 62-63k)
Miami dade county - 2183 deaths per million (per capita income 54k)
Los Angeles country - 2,334 deaths per million (per capita income 65k)
No I am not doing cost of living adjustments, too much work :). And yea, yea correlation, only a few examples, maybe should be a median, blah blah, this is post big deal. But still think it's about red states and blue states? S-o-c-i-a-l D-e-t-e-r-m-i-n-a-n-t-s o-f H-e-a-l-t-h. Of course policy also helps but that too probably flows from wealth. But with conditions of poverty hard hits many places could be predicted, and they did nothing to stop it either.
There may be other factors, noone really knows what all them are now though. Either way our politicians failed as hospitals became overwhelmed.
I think that's called cherry picking data, not terribly helpful but interesting none-the-less.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gardnr
My point wasn’t red state blue state but that doing lockdowns and people actually following them work. Which was what a previous poster had doubted. Ohio is a red governor state but they’ve done comparatively well overall because the governor took the pandemic seriously. Or at least had earlier. Not sure about their current status.
As part of just today's discussion on the topic it was pointed out that Texas and Florida were vying for the worst possible response to the pandemic, both states having been endlessly excoriated in the greater discussion by people who like to say things like "freedumb" when mentioning them. Another poster asked if those states were worse off than others and you chose to reply using cherry picked county stats to imply that 'yes they are'.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Of course the problem is that they are not. As of this very moment, Florida and California are statistically tied in deaths per 100,000 while the difference between those states and Texas is close enough to be a rounding error. And, it would appear that they're doing much better than approximately half of the other states.
Here's a link to current covid deaths per 100,000 for all 50 states and DC for anyone interested. • U.S. COVID-19 death rate by state | Statista
It's interesting to note that any particular state's lockdown status seems to have little effect on the numbers. I suspect it has more to do with population density, access to health care and other local factors, but that's just speculation on my part.
I agree that County stats are not useful if we’re talking about states.
But if we’re looking at death rates, don’t you have to look at age of the population as well? Are there a lot of old people in Florida? Arent there the fewer per capital old people in California?
Once again, statewide mandates don’t necessarily mean a lot. Cities and counties can be restrictive as they are in my state with the state itself is not restrictive. We can let local government manage this. No it’s a different question as *IF* they manage it.
The sneering and shaming —it’s just as effective as you all have told me for years it is. I thought we didn’t shame people? I thought shaming was not conducive to good human relations? I’m confused.
I guess at the end of the day we can bicker over whether red states or blue states did better at keeping people alive or we could bicker over what actions by governmental entities and individuals actually worked to keep people safe. There's enough evidence out there to indicate that things like mask mandates and limiting indoor gathering, regardless of where, worked if people actually followed them. Some places the government did the right thing, some places they didn't. Some places people actually follow the guidelines/mandates, and some places people haven't. Arbitrarily deciding that only whole state statistics matter is silliness that just ignores the reality that in the end people doing the right things is all that mattered. The government dictates mattered not much if people didn't follow them. And wouldn't have been necessary if people would've done the right thing if told what it was regardless of whether the government ordered it.
The thing that has been so dispiriting about this pandemic is the realization that there are a lot of people in this country who simply aren't willing to make any sort of sacrifice to their lifestyle in order to reduce the spread of a pandemic that has now killed more than half a million americans. So maybe it's not "yay freedumb". Maybe more accurately it's "yay selfishness!" And that comes from both sides of the political aisle. Only one dresses it up in the cloak of freedumb but plenty of people from both are behaving just as abhorrently.
this seems fallacious,maybe no true scottsman. So the counter argument would be "mask mandates and limiting indoor gathering (to the extent done in the U.S. which I think was woefully insufficient) didn't always work, see x, y, z". And then this could always be countered "but there was a mandate but it wasn't followed". I mean is there any way the argument doesn't become a closed one that could not possibly be disproved by any possible evidence because every counter example is met with "but it wasn't followed"?Quote:
There's enough evidence out there to indicate that things like mask mandates and limiting indoor gathering, regardless of where, worked if people actually followed them.
Mind you as a factual matter, I don't even believe it was all caused by "but it wasn't followed" anyway. It was to a large part driven by crowded living conditions and workers working essential jobs, at least as much as it ever was due to "bad people doing things they shouldn't". But sure since there was no real enforcement attempted, other countries had stricter enforcement but the U.S. never did, people breaking rules will always exist to some degree, if they didn't want it, maybe there should have been some enforcement.
I don't really blame the pandemic on the people's of this country by and large. I think that's a dishonest deflection those with actual power use to deflect their share of responsibility. It's straight up manipulation so that they never have to be held accountable for their actions.
I blame it on leaders, structural factors, and a certain amount of dumb bad luck perhaps. Polls often showed the majority wanted things not to be opened up so quickly in the spring, people were very cooperative then. It wasn't the majority of the people who wanted what happened, but government leaders made their choices driven by policy in D.C., driven by economic worries etc.. Certain things like masks became bizarrely politicized (in part due to Trump sure), but there was nothing all that inevitable in that either, it's just how it unfolded. The public health authorities gave bad advice after bad advice (never emphasized the difference between indoor and outdoor). They were objectively bad. As people we trudge along anyway maybe we know the difference between indoor and outdoor, maybe we don't, but many people tried to do the best they could, despite government failing almost utterly. All we ever got from them who had the actual power to have clear public communication and didn't and to close things down and didn't in time, was shaming, never a single thank you to all those doing what they understood, when powerful people's decisions on putting business first overwhelmed the hospitals.
My County, which did not have "draconian" lockdowns, has had 0 deaths per million.
We had such low incidence where we lived in Michigan, which was rural and by the lake, compared with the cities, that I think it has more to do with population density and air quality, particularly air quality. I also think there are genetic components as to who is more susceptible, and that maybe more enviromental things we don't yet know.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Definitely population density is a factor. My state's most rural county has fared best. I feel so lucky to have been working there since October and when case counts spike where I live I get groceries near work even though it is more expensive.
Population density ain’t the problem. The worst hit counties in Kansas are all sparsely populated rural counties.
I think it's increasingly random in terms of where it strikes the hardest. Vermont was extremely low in cases and deaths until the last few months. Even my rural county has spiked. Then you hear Florida and Texas bragging about how little they pay heed to safety measures and frankly, they're not dong all that bad--I think Florida is roughly in the middle of # of cases/deaths.
I'm not in favor of thumbing my nose at fate, however. I believe in masks and social distancing, but I think the patterns we've seen recently defy any "formula" for safety. Maybe these states with moderate numbers of cases despite no care in the world for masking are lying about their numbers, but I doubt it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
Certainly aggressive counting brings rewards to some jurisdictions, so there’s that. Aggressive counting, creative counting, benefit-of-the-doubt counting is going on to some extent.
In the Biden funeral giveaway, that there might engender a bit of creativity with death certificates. In case anyone thinks I am just making this up, one of the experts on the NPR show yesterday talked about the pressure this new giveaway will put on physicians ro write the correct thing on the death certificate. He is an academic in the social sciences whose area of study is death culture. That is “the science” as we know it, apparently.
I agree that there are many factors at work, but when I see the President accuse Texas of “Neanderthal thinking” and the recent botched 60 Minutes hit piece directed at the Florida Governor, I have to wonder if some of our media culture warriors are pushing a narrative here. Compared to say, New York or California these states seemed to do better at preserving their economies while doing as well on infections. There doesn’t seem to me to be much objective evidence for the constant drumbeat of contempt aimed at “freedumb”.
In my opinion, they absolutely are. I think people forget that media news organizations are independent businesses or profit centers for their owners, and selling their product to their preferred demographic is their ultimate goal. Sometimes that means giving their customers what they want by crafting narratives designed to keep their audiences coming back. Unfortunately, carefully crafted narratives sell better than objective analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
That business model requires a fair amount of effort from people wanting to be truly informed to separate the wheat from the chaff.
not density per se but overcrowding almost certainly played a roll. When you have 20 people or more living in a single family home or a single apartment unit, that's not your properly planned density, but it is overcrowding.Quote:
Population density ain’t the problem. The worst hit counties in Kansas are all sparsely populated rural counties.
but honestly saying states with "draconian" shutdowns didn't fare better is like saying "I used to eat 2 whole chocolates cake every night and couldn't lose weight, now I'm only eating 1 whole chocolate cake every night and yet I'm still not! I don't think my cake consumption has any effect on my weight at all!" Draconian restrictions no more actually existed that eating a chocolate cake a day is calorie restriction. If no restrictions at all existed would the death toll be even higher, probably.
Back in the early days the anti-lockdown folks were pointing to them to 'prove' that lockdowns weren't effective. Lets see how that worked out for them.
As of today:
Finland 157 dead per million
Norway 128 dead per million
Sweden 1369 dead per million.
Countries like South Korea and New Zealand, Cuba and Vietnam*, who took the threat seriously, are likely even lower.
Oregon and Washington are doing better than average (after Washington got blindsided), due IMO, to effective leadership.
*And many, many others. Our statistics are grim in comparison.
these are examples of zero-covid policy though right? I'm not sure when all is said and done they are going to conclude that lockdowns that do not try to eliminate the virus work all that well. As opposed to zero-virus, which DOES try to eliminate the virus and not let it come back, which has worked surprisingly well. But U.S. lockdowns were never ever that and there is no point in pretending they were. Supposedly "draconian lockdowns" included "outdoor dining" in tents, um ... yea.Quote:
Countries like South Korea and New Zealand, Cuba and Vietnam*, who took the threat seriously, are likely even lower.
Maybe it slowed transmission enough that some people will get the vaccine rather than the virus and if one is one of these people of course that's what they want. I suspect 50% of people may have had the virus here, so that's not much of a slowing, and is actually in so many ways a failure of policy. But that's still 50% that will get the vaccine rather than the virus, glass half full. But only because this is the U.S. and we are first in line for the vaccine, Europe and other places with slow vaccine rollout do not have time on their side.
Lockdowns can preserve hospital capacity when threatened, but the political will to do that was sometimes not even there. When you have an unknown virus and your hospitals are getting overwhelmed it makes some sense to do a lockdown though (early days in New York certainly).
Our contact tracing was next to non-existent, so I tend to agree with you.
Just ran across an interesting piece of news. Despite concerns to the contrary, apparently the number of suicides in the US during 2020 fell 6% from 2019.
Of course, we didn’t have to interact with each other!Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
it's humor but there is probably a lot to that (well except the people who live with people that are stressful - their life was no fun)Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Lol. Good point. Although to be honest the few times in my life I’ve thought about murdering someone after an unpleasant interaction it wasn’t myself. 😂Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I see Governor De Santis is still lying about the number of COVID deaths in Florida:
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinio...hs-from-public
I see that article was posted nearly a year ago. I suspect if they’re looking to create a red state Cuomo they’re going to need to be a little more creative.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
Update: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021...ovid-19-deathsQuote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
He's still at it.