Corona Virus

[Devil Doc]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I can't say the same. It has been a VERY politically motivated decision in my observation.  I don't think anyone is cheering mask wearing. Yeah, it sucks. But honestly, it's a relatively minor inconvenience. Certainly less inconveniencing than a widespread pandemic.

I can see where you are coming from.. in your circle of observation it is politically motivated. I have seen it from both sides honestly. One example, is a twitter video of a local club... no one was wearing a mask, and no one was social distancing. Why we  do not know the political origins of the patrons of this club, however, to think they are all the same political party is also projection. 

[GOAT]

2 minutes ago, Devil Doc said:

I can see where you are coming from.. in your circle of observation it is politically motivated. I have seen it from both sides honestly. One example, is a twitter video of a local club... no one was wearing a mask, and no one was social distancing. Why we  do not know the political origins of the patrons of this club, however, to think they are all the same political party is also projection. 

big facts.

that massive party that went viral in charlotte the other day looked like a petey pablo concert in 2005.

I'm sure the amount of MAGA hat wearing individuals was staggering lmao...

[45catfan]

1 minute ago, electro's horse said:

Are you willing to entertain the possibility that ideas on political organization from before the germ theory of disease probably aren't ideal for the current situation?

I'm willing to admit I don't think a central government will always have the correct answer, so giving one authority power over all situations like in a pandemic is just a dicey as leaving it up to local governments. If America was any other system, like other systems that favors a central government, then yes, people could squarely lay blame on the head of that government for any decisions they make.

[Devil Doc]

7 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

They're equal in that they're gathering of large numbers of people when medical professionals are saying that is the #1 thing we need to be avoiding. I'm completely removing the sociopolitical motivations from the equations because the virus does too. Do you really think the pool party goers aren't going to look at the media praising the protests and say "Well, if they can gather together so can we!" Nothing happens in a vacuum. I understand the motivation of the protesters but it still doesn't make gathering in huge crowds during a pandemic a good idea.

Which was exactly my point of shamming people.. Your going to Shame one, but not the other? That does not help the situation. When the News channels do this ( Which there is proof they did) all it created was a attitude of discontent. 

[electro's horse]

11 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

They're equal in that they're gathering of large numbers of people when medical professionals are saying that is the #1 thing we need to be avoiding. 

thats oversimplification

protestors are likely not going out to cramped bars afterwards. Congregating in giant pool parties or at the beach is generally going to lead to meeting up in bars and restaurants and shops afterwards; i don't think that's a controversial statement.

closing beaches was a way to decrease foot traffic to transmission sites and maintain some semblance of political cover. 

i mean its been proven how bad the beach parties were. this was the spread of one spring break in ft lauderdale

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/florida-spring-break-coronavirus.html

[Devil Doc]

5 minutes ago, GOAT said:

big facts.

that massive party that went viral in charlotte the other day looked like a petey pablo concert in 2005.

I'm sure the amount of MAGA hat wearing individuals was staggering lmao...

This is just a slight example. The issue is, when you start pointing fingers at certain political parties or people who are in a certain political party, but do not point fingers at the other side... it does not help anything. 

[electro's horse]

4 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

I'm willing to admit I don't think a central government will always have the correct answer, so giving one authority power over all situations like in a pandemic is just a dicey as leaving it up to local governments. If America was any other system, like other systems that favors a central government, then yes, people could squarely lay blame on the head of that government for any decisions they make.

so no. got it. 

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, Devil Doc said:

Which was exactly my point of shamming people.. Your going to Shame one, but not the other? That does not help the situation. When the News channels do this ( Which there is proof they did) all it created was a attitude of discontent. 

It's why I avoid the major news outlets. They're all tremendously biased to cater to their audience. The problem is that people actually WANT their news tremendously biased. Very few people want to face the discomfort of a differing opinion. Confirmation bias is comforting. I just wish people would stop getting their pandemic news from these sources. I wish they'd stop getting ANY news from them, but if we could start with pandemic news I'd definitely take that.

[Wes21]

7 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

I'm willing to admit I don't think a central government will always have the correct answer, so giving one authority power over all situations like in a pandemic is just a dicey as leaving it up to local governments. If America was any other system, like other systems that favors a central government, then yes, people could squarely lay blame on the head of that government for any decisions they make.

The idea of running the entire show from Washington is silly.  People actually expect federal agents to know that ABC hospital in Anytown, USA is running low on masks?  No.  And that's where the chain of command works.  The people at the hospital follow their protocol for it, then they kick it up the food chain.  If its a big enough deal, you could get city, county or even state agencies involved in the situation.  Either way ALOT has to happen before it goes to the feds, and ALOT of people need to be doing their part.  I swear I've seen people who genuinely think the feds are supposed to be sending out agents to do inventory on every hospital in America, and if the feds don't show up the people that work there or in the lower forms of government can just cross their arms and say "not my problem."

Edited July 20, 2020 by Wes21

[Devil Doc]

2 minutes ago, electro's horse said:

thats oversimplification

protestors are likely not going out to cramped bars afterwards. Congregating in giant pool parties or at the beach is generally going to lead to meeting up in bars and restaurants and shops afterwards; i don't think that's a controversial statement.

closing beaches was a way to decrease foot traffic to transmission sites and maintain some semblance of political cover. 

i mean its been proven how bad the beach parties were. this was the spread of one spring break in ft lauderdale

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/florida-spring-break-coronavirus.html

Is there proof that these Beach Goers, are not the same as protesters, or not the same as other gatherings? Were these beach goers a certain political party or certain political agendas? This is the point I am trying to make. 

[electro's horse]

1 minute ago, Devil Doc said:

Is there proof that these Beach Goers, are not the same as protesters, or not the same as other gatherings? Were these beach goers a certain political party or certain political agendas? This is the point I am trying to make. 

it's a facile point. 

"prove to me the political affiliation of every person" is sea lioning. do you honestly think these were BLM in fuging ft lauderdale during spring break? Like is that really an argument I'm supposed to entertain?

i was responding specifically to the dangers of having beaches open. you're conflating your stupid concern trolling with a different argument about spreads between protests and beach going

[KSpan]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

They're equal in that they're gathering of large numbers of people when medical professionals are saying that is the #1 thing we need to be avoiding. I'm completely removing the sociopolitical motivations from the equations because the virus does too. Do you really think the pool party goers aren't going to look at the media praising the protests and say "Well, if they can gather together so can we!" Nothing happens in a vacuum. I understand the motivation of the protesters but it still doesn't make gathering in huge crowds during a pandemic a good idea.

I agree with you completely in terms of medical risk if all things are equal but it's the necessity that separates them, like how shopping trips for groceries and shopping at Gucci (an extreme example but chosen for clarity) are both shopping trips but one has to happen and the other doesn't. 

Also, shouldn't all of the 'open back up' protests like the one in Michigan (as one example) not be included in this conversation? The ones here in Kansas were making int a point to be unmasked, even increasing the relative risks.

Edited July 20, 2020 by KSpan

[Devil Doc]

4 minutes ago, Wes21 said:

The idea of running the entire show from Washington is silly.  People actually expect federal agents to know that ABC hospital in Anytown, USA is running low on masks?  No.  And that's where the chain of command works.  The people at the hospital follow their protocol for it, then they kick it up the food chain.  If its a big enough deal, you could get city, county or even state agencies involved in the situation.  Either way ALOT has to happen before it goes to the feds, and ALOT of people need to be doing their part.  I swear I've seen people who genuinely think the feds are supposed to be sending out agents to do inventory on every hospital in America, and if the feds don't show up the people that work there or in the lower forms of government can just cross their arms and say "not my problem."

I am in school for a Masters in Emergency and Disaster Management.. this exact topic is drilled into the doctrine. The Feds are not hear to bail you out everytime, they are here to assist and provide an extra layer, they are NOT in charge. The more the states and local government rely on the Federal Government, it creates higher budgets, thinning of personnel, and too much bureaucracy. You State and Local Government is responsible for your mitigation, recovery and response, with guidance from the Federal Government. 

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, KSpan said:

I agree with you completely in terms of medical risk but it's the necessity that separates them, like how shopping trips for groceries and shopping at Gucci (an extreme example but chosen for clarity) are both shopping trips but one has to happen and the other doesn't. 

Also, shouldn't all of the 'open back up' protests like the one in Michigan (as one example) not be included in this conversation? The ones here in Kansas were making int a point to be unmasked, even increasing the relative risks.

Absolutely.