Page 104 of 604 FirstFirst ... 45494102103104105106114154204 ... LastLast
Results 1,031 to 1,040 of 6031

Thread: Conavirus......

  1. #1031
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Price County, WI
    Posts
    1,789
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    For all the talk of “irresponsible” Wisconsin, we compare favorably with our neighbors in deaths per 100,000 population (per statists.com). So far, Wisconsin has experienced 8 per 100,000, Iowa 11, Minnesota 13, Illinois 33 and Michigan 49.

    @ LDAHL,
    As of May 18, the death rate due to COVID-19 was as you say in those 5 states.
    The lowest death rate (in 3 states) was 1 per 100,000.
    The highest death rates were:
    NY 145
    NJ 117
    CT 96
    MA 84

    As of May 13, an international comparison:
    USA 27.9
    Canada 15.76
    Sweden 36.31
    South Korea .51
    Australia .40
    Iceland .21


    Source: http://www.statista.com/statistics/1...es-us-by-state

  2. #1032
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,681
    Talk about driving while looking in the rear view mirror. No death total from reopening could possible be known until at least a month afterward (and more if their are delays in reporting etc.), because two weeks to hospitalization, another 2 to death.

    And that's assuming you went out to a bar that day and caught deadly covid that day or something, which is probably less than the people affected through community spread because the thing is spreading and growing in the community, and so people are getting it even without being completely reckless and crazy, and that probably takes even longer for those cases to show up. That's why we have experts giving advice and not people looking in the rear view mirror for long term effects of policies only now being enacted. There's lots of variables of course, and there may be unknowns as well of course.
    Trees don't grow on money

  3. #1033
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    2,843

  4. #1034
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Gardnr View Post
    “Dangerous” is relative. Just ask an expert. For all the politically motivated pearl-clutching over Wisconsin political battles the last couple of months, Wisconsin has been relatively safer than it’s neighbors. It’s even been safer than Canada. It’s possible that could change in the future as different states accept different levels of risk (which they all must), but that doesn’t make them ignorant yahoos.

  5. #1035
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    9,863
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    For all the talk of “irresponsible” Wisconsin, we compare favorably with our neighbors in deaths per 100,000 population (per statists.com). So far, Wisconsin has experienced 8 per 100,000, Iowa 11, Minnesota 13, Illinois 33 and Michigan 49.
    But Wisconsin has a Republican majority legislature, you'd almost certainly have 0 per 100,000 if those Republicans didn't like killing people so much.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  6. #1036
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    9,863
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    It’s possible that could change in the future as different states accept different levels of risk (which they all must), but that doesn’t make them ignorant yahoos.
    I believe the preferred term is "rednecks" as in "all those uneducable rednecks refusing to listen to me".
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  7. #1037
    Yppej
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    I am so sorry Alan. Y, some states aren’t acting responsibly like Wisconsin. Nevada is opening slowly and our numbers meet the government guidelines. My hairdresser is a one person shop. We have eaten outside a few times. If I lived in Chicago I wouldn’t be going anywhere. My husband goes back to work Wednesday in San Jose so I will be getting more exposure regardless.
    My philosophy is also I am exposed anyways through my job, so why should I be restricted? Let high risk people stay home, pay them to stay home with tax dollars, deliver things to them, so long as they are willing to stay home. But don't curtail my freedoms because 1) you think you're protecting me when I'm already at risk and 2) vulnerable people who could stay home don't have the self-discipline to do so.
    Last edited by Yppej; 5-18-20 at 6:21pm. Reason: Fix punctuation

  8. #1038
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,543
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    “Dangerous” is relative. Just ask an expert. For all the politically motivated pearl-clutching over Wisconsin political battles the last couple of months, Wisconsin has been relatively safer than it’s neighbors. It’s even been safer than Canada. It’s possible that could change in the future as different states accept different levels of risk (which they all must), but that doesn’t make them ignorant yahoos.
    The reason WI was safer is because of being shutdown. Watch and see what happens now.

  9. #1039
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    But Wisconsin has a Republican majority legislature, you'd almost certainly have 0 per 100,000 if those Republicans didn't like killing people so much.
    Could be... do as trump does, don't wear a mask and tell everyone to open up those sports arenas. Hey, we need to get everyone out there! Unlike trump, we are not all tested daily. My hope is he gets the virus so he has some perspective of what is really going on. I would bet he would change his tune. Look at Boris Johnson... I read today that he thinks it may be a long time (if ever) that a vaccine will be available. Unlike trump, who is saying the vaccine will be available by year end. Although trump also said the virus would be gone by April.

  10. #1040
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,543
    Quote Originally Posted by Yppej View Post
    My philosophy is also I am exposed anyways through my job, so why should I be restricted? Let high risk people stay home, pay them to stay home with tax dollars, deliver things to them, so long as they are willing to stay home. But don't curtail my freedoms because 1) you think you're protecting me when I'm already at risk and 2) vulnerable people who could stay home don't have the self-discipline to do so,
    We KNOW what you think. You keep yapping about it daily.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •