Reflections on Tribalism in a Plague Year
In my darker moments, I’ve wondered what it would take to reunite today’s obstinately tribal America into something resembling a nation. A deadly plague? A world war? An alien invasion?
Well, it turns out we have all three on our hands.
1) Yes, a latter-day plague is spreading around the globe and snaking its way into the lungs of millions. The novel coronavirus can live on metal and plastic surfaces for days at a time, waiting patiently for unwary humans to serve as hosts and carriers. With an estimated mortality rate of just under 3% (up to 10% for older patients), COVID-19 can’t compare with the more lethal Ebola, SARS or MERS – but it blows them away in terms of sheer infectiousness and potential economic devastation.
2) Nations everywhere are mobilized as if for war. Trump even invoked the Defense Production Act, a radical measure that compels private enterprise to mass-produce needed supplies and equipment for the public good during national emergencies. (More on that later.)
3.) The COVID-19 pandemic is essentially an alien invasion; the planet has been set upon by an invisible but deadly life-form intent on destroying human civilization. The bugs might have the collective IQ of a barnacle, but they’ve proven their wanton genius for disrupting individual lives, schools, families, businesses, the stock market, and the very fabric that binds people together: an indispensable commodity known as social life.
Has the COVID-19 pandemic succeeded in bringing us together as a nation, despite its penchant for separating us as individuals? Sadly, no – at least not yet. We’re more wary than ever of strangers in our midst. We recoil from our fellow humans as if every casual encounter could prove fatal.
You’d think a massive invasion capable of afflicting untold millions of Americans would ignite a spark of unity, of mutual regard and sympathy, of renewed respect for the struggles of our neighbors. During the Great Depression and World War II, the vast majority of Americans rallied together regardless of class or politics.
Instead, our progressive friends have been ripping into the president at every opportunity – justifiably for his delayed response to the pandemic and his boneheaded rejection of testing kits from the World Health Organization… almost as justifiably for his predictably baseless optimism and hyperbole… but incredibly, even when he authorized a radical response with the kinds of measures (like the aforementioned Defense Production Act) that a New Deal Democrat might have ordered during a similar emergency.
When Rep. Ilhan Omar, certainly no moderate, praised Trump for his decisive actions, some of my progressive friends (and several pundits) went into full TDS – Trump Derangement Syndrome. Omar broke an unwritten commandment: progressives are simply not allowed to praise the unholy resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for any reason. I found myself in the unlikely position of defending Omar for defending Trump, when I’m not a fan of either – and of course I took heat on Facebook for my reckless intrusion into a “progressives-only” discussion.
The coastal elites continue to waft their contempt for the corn-fed masses of Middle America – especially Trump’s ever-loyal base. Our ongoing alien invasion still hasn’t given them the heart to understand why a group that feels despised by progressives would veer away from progressive politics and cling to a blunt demagogue for leadership.
As for the conservatives and libertarians – well, some of them have stepped up and shown themselves to be true disciples of Ebenezer Scrooge – the pre-Christmas Scrooge, not the reformed Scrooge. Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick went as far as to suggest that older Americans should willingly sacrifice themselves for the good of the economy.
Ah, the blessed economy! Holier than human life, and just as fragile. It’s easy to understand why conservatives would be wringing their hands over a devastating months-long suspension of business and revenues; I understand it, too. Of course, the big corporations stand to benefit from the record $2 trillion stimulus package recently approved by Congress and Trump himself. Let’s just hope the employees of those companies – not to mention all our vulnerable mom-and-pop businesses – see their share of benefits as well. With their income on hold, how many sidelined employees and small businesses can survive without an infusion of public money?
Our libertarian friends must be going apoplectic at the thought of government laying its heavy hand on the free market, even to save businesses crippled by the pandemic. You’d think such interventions would convince even the most obstinate social Darwinist that government is not always the enemy; in this case, it’s the white knight charging to the rescue. Will it convince them, though? I suspect they’ll be fretting about the slippery slope that leads to socialism, and I’ll leave them to their fretting.
Despite the apocalyptic scope of the COVID calamity and its politicization by our resident tribalists, it’s been heartening to witness stellar examples of human warmth and decency: quarantined Italians singing to one another from their balconies… restaurants offering free meals to children… grassroots humanitarians taking food and supplies to isolated senior citizens.
Extraordinary times usually call for extraordinary leaders, but we can’t depend on an inarticulate narcissist for inspiration – even when he happens to do the right thing. We can fantasize about having an FDR, a JFK, a Reagan or an Obama to guide our battered spirits through the pandemic and speak to our better angels. (We Americans desperately need to get in touch with our better angels.) Yet when we hear dire warnings that up to three-quarters of our population might catch the coronavirus, no amount of soaring rhetoric – let alone hand-scrubbing and social distancing – will ease the dread.
It’s up to us, as free individuals living in an interconnected community, to transcend the tribal and embrace the good. We can start listening to voices beyond our private circles, appreciating them for their character, their gritty wisdom, and the unique stories they tell – regardless of whether they vote red or blue. We can bond more deeply with our families and friends, despite the distances between us. If all goes well, we’ll never again take their presence for granted.
We’ll never again take our own existence for granted, either. We all know that our lives are finite, but maybe some of us have been running on autopilot for too long. Our bodies are miraculous machines – our minds even more so – and we should appreciate them while they’re still in working order.
We should probably wake up to the beauty and fascination of our surroundings, too. I’m a habitual walker, and I’ve noticed how poignant it seems that nature is blooming spectacularly even while our minds are consumed by the ongoing plague. Spring will continue to work its magic without sanitizer or safe distancing; you can’t quarantine a grove of cherry trees.
The wisdom of the Earth makes our tribal politics seem petty and pointless. Who were all those Democrats on the debate stage just a few months ago? Does anyone still think about Reince Priebus or Steve Bannon? We’re all transients here, so let’s stop squabbling and start enjoying our stay as friendly neighbors on this endlessly diverting planet.
Will we still need to throw ideas around for our amusement, edification and disagreement? Of course – as we should. But let’s hope this once-in-a-lifetime pandemic has taught us Americans that life is too short – and too great a gift – to squander by holding a grudge.
Rick Bayan is founder-editor of The New Moderate. His three brilliant (but sadly unsung) essay collections are available in e-book form on Amazon.com for only $2.99 each. Just search under “Rick Bayan.”
THE NEW MODERATE 
Rick “But let’s hope this once-in-a-lifetime pandemic has taught us Americans that life is too short – and too great a gift – to squander by holding a grudge. ”
You have a much greater expectation of our leaders who set the example for all Americans than I do. Even before this is 25% over, everyone is trying to place blame before all the facts are known. For instance, multiple times one will see accusations that the pandemic response team was cut. Has anyone deep dived into the impact, if the work was eliminated, was the work transferred to other capable individuals, was there no impact at all, etc?
If all the leaders (and their mouth piece media outlets) do is attack any politician before detailed investigative analysis of all decisions before and during any crisis, including this one, then your hope is more a dream than reality.
The claim is the “national security pandemic team was cut”.
It is not even their job to thwart pandemics, only to analyze their effect on national security.
Dave “The claim is the “national security pandemic team was cut”.
It is not even their job to thwart pandemics, only to analyze their effect on national security”.
But is that what so many on the left are portraying? Or is it “OH MY GOD, LOOK WHAT TRUMP DID TO US BY CUTTING THAT TEAM!!!!!!”
You continue to say “I dont care”. You continue to say “people are free to make up their own minds”.
Well I CARE !!!!!!!!! I care because people are being brain washed by facts not verified. I care because voters vote based on brain washed thinking. I care because free countries become Venezuela’s after voting for candidates supported by brain washed voters. I care because their votes eventually impact me through governments based on unverified facts.
Just look at the comments by everyone here. How many times do we see comments by all of us that we don’t take the time to deep dive into the details before commenting. I do it, but I do try to verify some of the things I comment on like the Spanish flu. And even then the facts that can be found are not always the same.
Have we not seen “Trump cuts pandemic team” here with no factual information presented showing the impact of that action. Yes, because no one has done an investigative analysis yet of that action by Trump.
Everyone wants to stay in the cocoon with their tribe spouting the tribal messages without taking any of their time to question those facts. Any of them on any subject. Not just Trump, Obama 43 or any other political decision.
Just like Rick comments on Trump rejecting WHO offer for test kits. Did he deep dive into that? Maybe, maybe not. According to a WHO spokesperson “No discussions occurred between WHO and CDC about WHO providing COVID-19 tests to the United States,” said WHO spokesperson Margaret Harris. “This is consistent with experience since the United States does not ordinarily rely on WHO for reagents or diagnostic tests because of sufficient domestic capacity.” According to the report, WHO focuses on countries without expertise and facilities to help themselves.
Now is that true or not? Who knows, but it needs to be verified before running around claiming something that may or may not be true.
I do not care any more about the left’s “brainwahsing” than the purported claims that Russia through stupid social media ads “influenced our elections”.
To the extent we have a failure – it is that our education system has become one of political indoctrination, rather than teaching critical thinking.
If people are “brainwashed” – that is a failure of our education system to make them capable of making decisions.
There are two different allegations regarding testing that are conflated.
The first is a “shortage of test kits” – that claim is crap – first the intial attempt to contain this at the borders requires extremely small amounts of resources, but it requires moving very rapidly and with near perfection. It is about identifying and quarantining a very small number of people as well as everyone they have exposed as quickly as possible with out missing many people.
With each missed person and each cycle the problem grows exponentially larger.
In this effort testing is very nearly useless. You do not quarantine people because they tested positive – you quarantine them because they were exposed.
Japan successfully followed this model and did less testing than the US.
Next a “test kit” is 3 cotton balls on sticks and sterile containers to put them in.
The actual Testing failure of the NIH/CDC/FDA was their own failure to develop a successful test, their failure to make any use of the experience of any others in developing tests, and their active interference in third party testing and development.
When the first effort to contain fails – extremely wide spread testing can be an effective means of regaining control – that is effectively what the South Koreans did.
Having lost control testing becomes a means of establishing the behavior of the disease – to give some certainty to many of the current unknowns.
Every single thing that is described that went wrong here would have self corrected quickly if government had allowed the free market to work.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/03/31/former-cdc-head-coronavirus-testing-went-wrong-how-proceed-column/5090097002/
We are not great because our leaders are great – we are great because our ideals are great.
https://nypost.com/2016/07/03/what-really-makes-america-great-you-the-individual/
Ron: There’s still so much about this pandemic that fits into the “we don’t really know” category. So yes, the hysterical accusations don’t help the situation.
To some extent the accusations are inevitable.
The competition between ideas is fundimental to human advancement.
Our partisan politics are merely a relatively ofal reflection of that.
But ultimately – whether by our leaders or each of us as individuals decisions have to be made based on the information that we have and our judgements regarding its quality.
We frequently do not get to know all that is knowable before we have to make decisions.
1). We know it can live on surfaces – though most sources I have read claim hours not days, depending on the surface itself.
Pretty much all the advice we have been given is based on colds and flu’s. It is highly likely that Covid19 spreads like colds and flu’s. But like myriads of other things we have no certainty yet. Ultimately we will, but for now, our precautions are based on what works for colds and flu’s.
While we should not presume because we do not know something for certain the advice is “fake”.
We should still be careful. We are making lots of decisions based on poor and incomplete knowledge – that is how things often must work in the real world.
Our government has made some mistakes. Some of them are Clearly Trump’s and some Trump’s because he is president.
At the same time – as the US government has not done as well as a few asian countries but it has done as well as the best of europe and better than most of europe.
If Trump handled this badly – then pretty much all governments have handled this badly.
There may be good reason to crticise all governments handling of this.
There may be good reason to criticise Trump.
But the arguement that Trump has uniquely failed – does not hold water.
There is alot to think about the proper role of government – especially when we get past this and can look at information better.
But attacking Trump’s optimism is a bit much.
First because Trump actually does know something that aparently you and all the experts do not – but they should. They odds of EVERY variable resolving to the worst possible case is slim. I do not know exactly how bad this is, but the probability of it being as bad as health experts predict is actually quite low.
A few days ago we were told atleast 2million deaths in the US, then “oops” that is wrong, it will only be 100-200,000. Who know what we will be told tomorow.
But pessimism serves absolutely no purpose.
Further Trump’s optimism serves a real purpose. ‘
Trump has undeniably gotten the CDC/FDA off there asses and pushed them out of this we will not allow anything that is not proven perfect first nonsense.
We are trying Hydroxychloroquine in New York – as well as several other things.
Even if all these do not pan out – they give us hope, and we have not given up.
You say Trump is too optomistic – what do you think of Churchill.
The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.
Winston Churchill
I have nothing against optimism when applied properly; during a crisis it’s a valuable commodity. FDR and Churchill used it effectively and eloquently to give people courage during dark times.
I was critical of Trump’s downplaying the pandemic and urging the country to get back on track by Easter, a folly that could have cost a few hundred thousand lives. I’m grateful that he seems to be tempering his unrealistic statements these days.
He can still rise to the occasion by urging us to save lives and lower the death toll by taking precautions. He can say we’ll get through the pandemic if we all pull together. That kind of optimism would be “fitting and proper.”
I agree with you that Trump is wrong.
But in the exact opposite sense.
The government should “quarantine” those at the most risk, it should quarantine everyone who is sick. It should quarantine anyone who has been exposed. It should bar large gatherings. It should provide us with recomendations. It should conduct its own affairs in a way that is an example to the rest of us. In every other way it should leave the choices up to us. And it should have done that from the start. South Korea did not shutdown. Singapore did not shut down, Taiwan did not shut down, Japan did not shut down, Sweden did not shut down – every one of those countries has done better thus far than the US. There are other examples, but I have not looked at every country in the world.
There is no such thing as an essential business or a non-essential business.
We are already seeing how free markets innovate to meet our needs.
It appears that Obama blew through the strategic reserve of 100m N95 respirators and masks with swine flu leaving only 5M and never replacing them. That continued for the past 3 years – so Trump bears some responsibility to.
But the shortfall of masks and respirators is being dealt with. Perfectly ? No, but soon enough there will be no shortage. Whether it is 3M or MyPillow, the masks are being made, and will be plentiful soon enough.
Ventalators are more complex and will take more time, but they will come.
We have more than enough toilet paper and hand sanitizer and wipes, but we do not have enough stock boys to refill the shelves.
If government stayed out of testing – you could get drive by or at home tests several weeks ago, and the entire country could be tested by now – if we wanted to.
Whatever the problem is soon enough free markets will find the answer.
With government we have people being arrested for walking on empty beaches, or sitting in empty parks, or playing tennis, or walking their dogs.
We have the possibility that 25% of tenants are not paying their April rent in the next few days – including commercial tenants. We have $1.5T in debt for residential and commercial leased space that could quickly go into default.
We are shortly going to see spikes in suicides, a wide assortment of drug overdoses, alcohol poisoning, we will see rises in violent and property crimes, we will see rises i domestic violence. These are already baked in – some would have been inevitable no matter what.
But most are not, but they will be the longer this shutdown continues.
Regardless, trust people to work things out themselves. N95 masks are increasingly available, a mask, gloves, glasses or goggles and you reduce transmission by 95%, even masks along are over 60%.
“Let 10,000 flowers bloom”. It will be chaotic, but people will work this out.
Neither you nor I can guess at the creative solutions people will come up with.
But we can know that they will. BTW the same is true in reverse regarding the economic shutdown. I listed a few of the known effect that will result in DEATHS, but neither you nor I can know all the different ways that shutting down the economy will harm and kill people.
But you should be able to know it will.
And rather than shutting everything down for 6 weeks they will come up with solutions that are sustainable – that can continue for as long as necessary.
I do not want no stinking stimulus, I do not want no stinking shutdown.
Let people work this out. We can handle this, and we will adapt as necessary.
No top down government solution can do that.
There are lots of people who say lots of stupid things. There does not appear to be any ideological constraints on saying stupid things.
If we are going to judge an ideology based the stupid remarks of some adherent – all ideolgies – including moderation are looney.
The economy is not more sacred than life.
It IS life. IF you fork up the economy – where is the wealth coming from to pay for cancer treatments, diabetes treatments, safe work places, all the things that make life good and healthy.
If you reduce standard of living – people will die. You may not clearly see them hauled out of hospitals in body bags – but they will still be DEAD.
Further each of us will live shittier lives.
Worse still it is the bleeding hearts who purported care so much for the poor who seem to are the least. It is the people with 6 figure incomes who can work from home and whose greatest inconvenience from this is being scared to go shopping, who are the most willing to sacrifice the jobs and futures and health of the working class in this country that is getting its teeth kicked in by this.
Please do not “Ebeneezer Scrouge” me on this. If you do not think the economy is DEATHLY important right now – you are trading your safety for both the safety and the future of the working class.
It should be crystal clear at this moment exactly why a strong economy is important.
Your IRA might be taking a beating at the moment – but if you have a 6 figure income you can hold on 6 or 12 months and it will recover.
If you are living hand to mouth, and your hours have been cut back or you have been laid off, which matters to you a 1:100 chance you will die from a disease that at the moment your odds of getting are 1:1000 or the fact that you can not pay for rent or food or heat or light ?
One of the things this is exposing is how sheltered from reality so many people are.
Believe me, I feel the pain of all those restaurants, shops and other small businesses being hurt by the shutdown. But what’s the alternative: let people back into crowded shops, restaurants and workplaces while the death toll skyrockets because of mass-contamination? No. You simply can’t keep the free marketplace open for business as usual if it promotes widespread illness and death.
This is where you might need to gulp hard and sacrifice your libertarian principles until the pandemic subsides. Government is capable of keeping businesses alive with direct payments during the crisis — no strings attached, no slippery slope to socialism. I wouldn’t mind paying extra taxes next year if it means saving the small businesses in my community (and elsewhere).
“Believe me, I feel the pain of all those restaurants, shops and other small businesses being hurt by the shutdown.”
Clearly you do not – and it goes well past restaurants. We had a 3.5M spike in unemployment last week – and it is likely to get worse. It is unlikely a single person on this blog will lose their jobs – the losses will be disproportionately working class people – particularly minorities.
We here the left rant about racism – the effects of this shutdown are going to hit minorities HARD – 2-3 times as hard – or more than the rest of us.
“But what’s the alternative ?”
The alternative is simple – let people work these things out for themselves.
I can list a number of things that can be done.
spread customers out within the resturaunt – as one example, but the point is NOT to tell people how to solve problems, it is to allow them to solve them, themselves.
I am not going out to a resturant for a long time – I am almost 62 and I had part of my right lung removed 40 years ago, and I pick up colds and flu easily, and I am a man – 7:10 deaths are men.
But that is me chosing. You get to make different choices. Waitresses get to make their own choices, younger people get to make their choices.
And people will find creative answers to this.
Your thinking is too rigid – and frankly that is disturbing – why do you think that suddenly there will be busy resturants and theaters – when I doubt you would risk going to a crowded restuaraunt even if you could – and I certainly would not.
Regardless, the FACT is that everyone’s risk of Covid19 is not the same and everyone’s risk from shutting down the economy is not the same.
By shutting things down you are not saving us from harm. You are just dictating who will get harmed the most.
“No. You simply can’t keep the free marketplace open for business as usual if it promotes widespread illness and death.”
You have drawn a conclusion that has no basis in fact.
Outside of china, not a single country that has dealt successfully with this has shutdown its economy. That does not mean that lots of things have not slowed down. But they did so because people made individual choices.
Some people stay in. Some people go out but take precautions – like gearing up, or avoiding crowds, regardless people make their own choices.
“This is where you might need to gulp hard and sacrifice your libertarian principles until the pandemic subsides.”
Apparently you do not understand what a principle actually is.
“Government is capable of keeping businesses alive with direct payments during the crisis — no strings attached,”
No it is not – and you are smart enough to know better. Aside from the impossibly difficult practical problems of knowing where to direct payments,
There is the more fundimental problem that MONEY IS NOT WEALTH.
If it were – we could just shut down the economy entirely and print piles of money.
We could do it during the “pandemic” we could continue after.
But you know that is impossible.
Government can through this idiotic policy play a shell game, but it does not create.
I am told we have shutdown about 20% of the economy right not.
We are 20% poorer that we would have been. period. You can not fix that.
Whatever was not made, no amount of government stimulus will cause it to be made.
Nor is any of this new or news. We have tried this many times before – it does not work.
It does not work – because it can’t.
Do I really need to pound on this for pages ? Or can you grasp that if we do not produce something – it does not exist. It we produce 80% as much as we did before – we have reduced our standard of living 20% – and there is no amount of money in the entire world no stimulus that can fix that.
You can play games with how the pie is divided – but you can not fix the fact that you have a smaller pie.
Worse still – this is going to absolutely positively hit those near the bottom the hardest.
As I noted before – you and I will not have to pay for this – short of a brief hit to our IRA’s.
But the working class is going to take the biggest hit – and that means they do not get a 20% kick in the teeth, they get a 40% or more kick in the teeth.
“no slippery slope to socialism.”
That is not the issue – though the statement is false. Venezeulla has spent more than a decade following exactly this “stimulus” process – how well has that worked ?
It is unimportant whether it is poor economic policy or a virus that reduces what is produced, you can not fix it by dumping money.
“I wouldn’t mind paying extra taxes next year”
All government spending is ultimately paid for by the people.
It is not especially important whether it is paid for by inflation, higher taxes, or reduced services. It is still going to be paid for. It is not free money.
“if it means saving the small businesses in my community (and elsewhere).”
but you wont – and frankly you do not want to, if government did manage to save small business the long term negative effects would be large. We already have big business slurping at the trough of government the last thing we want is small bussiness to figure out how to push up to the trough. Government subsidies destroy business.
Rick, I agree completely with the lock down. In 1918 the cities the relaxed too quickly had a double spike in deaths. Those states/cities that remained locked down long into the declining curve did not experience that same increase in cases/deaths.
The data you have from 1918 is incomplete and not well specified.
Further you fixate on spikes as meaningful.
All the modeling demonstrates that nearly all the techniques being used do not change the area under the curve.
i.e. you will get the same number of total cases, they will just be spread out longer.
Further I have provided numerous statistics that show the increased number of deaths due to the negative economy – and those are only the obvious ones.
So all you doing is sacrificing freedom for a different way of killing people.
I do not understand why it is so hard for you all to understand that the death of the economy is the death of people. Lower standard of living means more death.
So even if the only thing you care about is lives – you still lose.
Finally – it does not matter whether you agree with the lockdown or not.
If there is a runaway train coming down the tracks and you can do nothing to stop it, but there is a track switch infront of you and if you flip it – you will kill one person and if you do not, you will kill another – what do you do ?
The analogy is not perfect – in reality your moral problem is larger.
You are using force to choose who will die AND infringe on liberty.
Don’t play god with peoples lives and do not presume that you know enough to make decisions involving the use of force.
Do you actually know what results you will get each way ?
If you do not, then you do not even have a utilitarian argument.
I would note from your own comment won of the problems with your 1918 data – is it a graph of cases or is it a graph of deaths ?
They are not the same thing. They do not have the same meaning or weight.
I do not think it is possible to tell from your data source, and that makes the reliability of the source questionable.
Lets assume it is a graph of deaths, and lets assume that the spike represents an actual increase in deaths, rather than stringing them out over more time, which is what the models show,
BTW I will be happy to admit that the models are just models. But they are all we have.
We do not have the oportunity to run reality each way and actually see which result is better, we can only run models, each way. Reality we only get to do one way.
Now we have made all those assumptions, now lets flip it – and the numbers are cases, not deaths.
Do you get to wreak havoc on the economy in order to alter the number of people who get sick rather than the number of people who die ?
Next – what is the difference between Covid19 and the Flu ?
If we are free to lock down the entire economy over Covid19 – why can’t we do so over the seasonal flu ? The US estimated Flu deaths this year are between 28K and 68K people – that is more than global Covid19 deaths thus far. Can we shut down the entire economy every year to reduce flu deaths ? It will work about as well as it does with Covid19
What is the degree of scaryness that warrants shutting down the economy ?
If 61M infections and almost 70K deaths is not enough – then what is ?
You say letting the economy free earlier will produce more deaths – based on a 100 year old graph of a disease with different properties, and where we had not antivirals, no ICU’s no ventalators, no N95 masks, little understanding of social distancing and on and on.
Whats thd difference between covid-19 and the flu?
Are you REALLY asking that question?
Yes the flu claims 30,000; 40,000; 50,000+++++ live each year.
BUT and thats the BIG BUTT….I am free to choose if I get a flu shot that may be 50% effective and if I get the flu, it may reduce the symptoms by 50%. That shot may be the difference between me living and dieing.
Covid-19 has no cure nor vaccine. You get exposed, most likely you will get it. If this is ignored, then a bad flu season is magnified by the numbers that got the flu shot. If 50% get that shot,then flu cases are controlled by some number up to 50%. Not so when no one is vaccinated!
There was no flu shot for most of my life.
There is no flu shot for most of the world.
The flu typically arises in China.
Epidemioligists in China try to sort out from what they see in birds and pigs today what is likely to make it to humans in 18 months and they develop the vaccine based on those quesses. I beleive the flu shot typically is for 3-5 different strains of potential flu’s.
If they guess wrong and the actual flu that runs round the world is not one of those – then the flue shot does nothing.
There is no guarantee in any year that the flu shot will work AT ALL.
That is part of why some years are bad and we get almost almost 70M cases in the US and see almost 70K deaths.
Those are the years when the flu shot did not work at all.
“Covid-19 has no cure”
The flu has no cure.
most of the same things that mitigate the flu, mitigate Covid19.
The HydroxyChloroquie/Zythromax combo is being reported by some experts as a cure.
it has been used in china, and france, and it was used very extensively in South Korea where we have the lowest mortality rate and probably the best testing.
With better testing it may prove to be a cure. It also may prove a dud, or any number of possibilities in between.
We have a very large number of antivirals. This is not 1980 and Aides – where BTW many of the treatments that the FDA pissed over proved effective – especially in combination.
But some did not.
It is highly likely that our ability to treat this will increase quite rapidly.
Lots of people are painting this as a harbringer of future disasters.
More likely it is the last possible pandemic of this type.
We are not likely very far from having the equivalent of antibiotics for many if not all antivirals.
The use of Hydroxychloroquine and Zythromax against Covid19 did not come out of thin air.
Hydroxychloroquine and Doxycyclene were used against some viral diseases 25 years ago.
There were also laboratory experiements against SARS and MERS. There is reason to beleive that the combination is a generally effective antiviral – particularly against Corona Viruses. but research has been slowed because there is little money in Chloroquines, and there was no untreatable pandemic driving research.
But even if that proves less effective than hoped or even ineffective. There are more than 100 other drugs being researched right now.
And contra claims I have heard here – we are increasingly able to cure viral diseases.
We have “cured” aids in a number of people – we can not do so reliably, but we have a start.
We can cure Hep C 95% of the time. And there are other viral diseases we have cured.
Maybe we are at the end of the road for viral diseases.
Or maybe we are just at the begining of the end.
But we are not completely helpless.
There are more than a dozen vaccines for Covid19 right now – and unlike the flu every one of those actually targets Covid19. How quickly we have a vaccine is a function of how much risk we are willing to take – nothing else..
Periodically the Flu vaccine does not work at all.
The flu had never infected more than 27% of the population – even when there were no vaccines. No infectuous disease has ever hit more people than that.
There are more than 200 cold viruses – and most of us have no natural immunity to them.
Yet the cold does not cause pandemics – or we do not notice.
the fact is that every disease has some natural limits to the numbers of people who will get it.
There is far more science does not know than what it knows, and one of those things is what those natural limits are and why.
On the cruise ships which are close to optimal for the spread of an airborne virus we saw about 20% infection rates. That is likely the theoretical max for Covid19.
In the real world the widest spread we have seen is iceland where just under 4% of people MIGHT have gotten it and 80-90% were asymptomatic.
Which BTW means the actual fatality rate is the same or LOWER than the flu.
It is possible there is something wrong with the iceland data.
But if that is the case – we have not seen Covid19 spread to more than 0.3% of the population – but with a 10 times higher mortality rate.
There are STILL large numbers of factors WE DO NOT KNOW.
But the odds of this infecting high percentages of the population AND having a high mortality rate are increasing LOW.
“You get exposed, most likely you will get it.”
No Ron, we just plain do not know right now. But the odds are heavily that Covid19 is either much harder to get than we beleive OR much less lethal – or even both.
BTW I do not think more than 30% of people in the US get the flu shot and world wide it is much lower.
Yes those people with the flu shot form an impediment to the spread of the flu – but only in the west, and only if they guess right on the flu vaccine, and occasionally they do not.
Regardless, some immunity which also provides some level of herd immunity comes from the flu shot most of the time.
But the same is true of asymptomatic Covid19 targets.
While they may or may not be able to spread Covid19 – for possibly 20 days,
Ultimately they too become immune. Those who are asymptomatic become immune, those with mild cases become immune. Those who survive serious cases become immune.
We do not know how long that immunity lasts. and we have had a tiny number of people who were reinfected, but it is highly likely that immunity lasts atleast many months.
Immunity to smallpox lasts atleast 65 years. We beleive that immunity to the flu is similar.
We have had flu’s that did not infect anyone over 50.
Dave, OK, 27% bad flu rate. Lets say that is true without the added contagion covid-19 seems to have. And the latest mortality rate published in Webmd is .0066 or .66%.
So 320,000,000 population
27%:get it is around 86,000,000
Mortality of .0066 on 86,000,000 is 570,000
So what is your acceptable number of deaths before you would say “enoung is enough”.
Life to me is much more important than businesses making money or staying in business. If 1000 restaurants close in NYC, I find their death is less distressing than 1000 human lives being lost. Those 29-45 are the age group representing almost 50% of the cases and they mingle, catch it and pass it on the seniors who have the highest death rate.
I understand your thinking about the importance of the economy. Its like the abortion fight. The rights of one group being opposed by the pro-life group. (And yes, where those that are not supporting life on one issue could be supporting life on the other. Doesnt make sense to me, but that is not our discussion right now.)
27% is the maximum we have seen from any virus.
It is NOT the norm.
Thus far in the absolutely optimal conditions of a cruise ship no one has seen more than a 20% infection rate, I beleive the current Cruise ship Zaandam has 2400 passengers and crew, 4 deaths – but only 2 from Covid19, and 45 infections. That is a sub 2% infection rate.
If the Iceland data is correct that is a sub 4% infection rate with 80-90% of the infected showing no symptoms.
Iceland has 1200 REPORTED infections and 4 deaths in a population of 365K.
If the 4% infection rate is correct then Iceland actually has 14K cases – most of which are asymptomatic. And a fatality rate of 0.0003 – that is much lower than the flu.
In the US a 4% infection rate would be 12.4M people and at a 0.0003 fatality rate that would be 4000 deaths. We have already exceeded that, So it is likely that something is wrong with the Iceand data, but the magnitude of the error would have to be incredible to get to 570K deaths in the US.
BTW the 1918 Spanish Flu killed 650K people in the US. With a population of 104M,
Worse the 1918 flu specifically targeted HEALTHY people.
We can play numbers games forever. there are models that produced 7M deaths in the US.
You seem to have accepted my 27% limit – Why ?
I am not trying to undermine my own argument. I am trying to point out how much we do not know.
I think that the natural limit for Covid19 absent optimal conditions is more like 4% or more accurately it is probably 10% in cities 4% in suburbs and 1% in rural areas.
But that is just a guess – based on what we are seeing worldwide.
There are 58M people in Hubei – we all beleive the Chinese were lying. By how much ?
Were there 2M people with Covid19 in Hubei alone ? that is 4%.
Italy has a population of 60M Their lockdown though dramatic was way late. Do you think there are 2M people infected in italy rather than the 100K reported ?
If so then the death rate is below 1% and italy has a very old population.
We are now getting information that 2/3 of those who die would have died in 6 months regardless, In italy more than 50% of the dead had 3 very serious health problems.
all but a few percent had atleast one life threatening health problem.
Are you prepared to fork over the lives of 10’s of millions of people, to gain an extra 3-6 months of likely pain and suffering for a few thousand people ?
“What is the acceptable number of deaths ?”
Wrong question. What is the required number of NET lives saved to justify shutting down the economy ? that is the question.
Sweden has not locked down. They have 548 cases/million of population. The US has locked down – they have 750/million.
Italy had the most draconian lockdown – they has 1900 cases/million
South Korea did not lockdown 192/million
Taiwan – no lockdown 14/million
We do not have much evidence that lockdowns actually work.
Your asking everyone to bet 10’s of millions of jobs against some unknown possibility that you will save lives.
I would note that the models do not show lockdowns working unless they are 90%.
Anything less prolongs this but does not change the number of infections.
Abortion is not a conflict of rights. Nor is this.
There is no actual right to life, only the right not to have life taken by you by the unjustified use of force by another.
That applies to abortion and to this. If you misstate what our actual rights are, then you will reach false conclusions.
In both abortion and Covid19 you are confusing a right to freedom – to be free from being forced by another, with a right to have something.
Liberty guarantees you little – not even life. It only guarantees that force will not be used to prevent you from attaining what you hope for. It does not assure you will get it.
But arrangements with less freedom work out worse in nearly every way – including people dying.
As murders and rapes start increasing, as thefts increase, as suicides increase as drug overdoses increase, as alcohol related deaths increase, as domestic violence increases, as people lose their cars, their homes, …..
are you still going to be telling me that the economy is less important than extending the life of terminally ill people a few months ?
We have an enormous number of unknowns regarding Covid19.
Though we are slowly zeroing in on PROBABLE values for those unknowns.
But most importantly the odds are heavily against all unknowns resolving in the worst possible way. And that is what must occur for Covid19 to justify shutting down the economy.
Italy has peaks and is headed down the curve slowly.
Many other european nations have peaked.
Globally we appear to have peaked or are close to it – the daily new cases have not risen much in 7 days.
Disclaimer – the global data is the worst quality.
The US is between 5 days and 2 weeks behind much of the world. We were more effective at keeping it out, and are therefore further behind the growth curve.
But the rate of increase in daily cases in the US appears to have slowed – we are still not at the peak, but we MIGHT be close.
20 US states have less than 1000 cases – most only a 100 or so.
47 US states have less than 10,000 cases.
NY has almost 50% of US cases,
NY, NJ, and CA have significantly more than 50% of cases.
Rick;
I beleive with near absolute certainty that when we allow it to happen the economic recovery from this will be incredibly rapid.
But every week this economy is in lockdown the losses are enormous.
Predictions are for unemployment to increase by 6.5M next week – that is on top of the never even close to seen 3.5M last week and big business has just started to lay people off.
In myriads of areas of the economy production has tanked.
I do not know why it is so difficult for you to understand but The gold fairy could dump 20T of new gold into Fort Knox tomorow allowing (according to gold cranks) the US Government to spend many $T more without raising taxes – and pay of the national debt.
And that would do absolutely nothing to mitigate the damage.
Money is not wealth. Not even Gold. Adam Smith proved this conclusively 250 years ago, it should be trivial to grasp, and yet time and again people – even some very smart people are deluded.
Our standard of living is based SOLELY on the value we PRODUCE.
If we do not produce value – we will be poorer PERIOD.
You can not make even a tiny dent in that with money.
Your arguments about slippery slopes and socialism and willingness to pay more taxes next year are both wrong and irrelevant.
Oddly I suspect this gargantuan stimulus bill will be less harmful that I would normally predict.
Though I will bet hugely that the vast majority of it goes into the pockets of the politically connected, not those who most need it. That is always what happens.
This time will be no different.
But the fundimental problem is not the damage of the $2T “stimulus” – and it will be net negative, no stimulus spending has EVER been net positive, I would expect that it will reduce our future GDP by about 1.5% for a couple of years. That would track with prior data on government spending. No government has ever spent itself into economic growth.
Japan tried something like this in the 90’s and subsequently – and lost a decade.
Spending does not work.
The fundimental reason it does not work should be absolutely obvious by the particular circumstances right now. You can not fill a whole in production with money.
All money is a claim against what is produced – nothing more.
Spain went from the worlds only super power in the 1400’s to a backwater, while England want from irrelevance to the worlds only superpower by the mid 1900’s.
This despite the fact that Spain was pillaging the new world of unbeleivable amounts of gold.
If you can not make up for deficits in production with gold, how do you expect to do so with paper ?
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/65-million-initial-jobless-claims-tomorrow
Absolutely the beneficiaries of this stimulus will be “some senators son”.
Regardless, it is not possible for government to do this right.
Every single person in this country has different needs and has been harmed by this in different ways. As has every business. There can be no effective one size fits all solution, and it is not possible for any government to construct a stimulus that comes close to the individual needs necescary to actually make things worse.
If I would to predict – the stimulus made recovery harder – not easier.
If you want an example of what government should do, look to Harding and Coolidge in 1920.
A deep, but very short depression with an actual v shaped recovery.
You say there is something wrong with libertarian opposition to the stimulus.
Can you cite an actual example where this nonsense worked ?
Why should libertarians not oppose feel good stupidity ?
Absolutely NO ONE opposes government doing something that actually works.
But this does not work.
There was no stimulus in 1920 – Harding and coolidge cut taxes, cut government spending and cut the debt – V shaped rapid recovery.
Hoover and FDR tried just about everything in response to the 1929 crash – and the result – the longest depression by far in US history.
Repeated bouts of Keynesian stimulus in the 60’s and 70’s gave us “stagflation” that destroyed Carters presidency.
Did Reagan respond to the 1980 recession with stimulus ?
Nope, Tax cuts and he produced the longest period of sustained growth in US history.
How did Cash for Clunkers work out ?
TARP ?
ARRA ?
The great recession – and the massive stimulus that followed produce the second longest and weakest recovery in US history.
If you hate Trump – you should hope this stimulus works pretty much like all preceding ones.
Money is the lubricant for the economy. IT IS NOT the economy itself.
The problem with the economy right now is that we have deliberately SHUT IT DOWN.
We are producing less. Absolutely no amount of money will cause the economy to produce more so long as people are forced to stay home.
The only thing that dumping money into the economy will do know is raise prices.
What is the definition of inflation ? More money chasing fewer goods ?
This is not about some slippery slope to socialism. We see all arround us right now the evidence that free markets work and socialism does not.
We are seeing toilet paper makers step up. God knows why we suddenly need more Toilet Paper – but who cares, they will make as much as we will buy. The only limit being how quickly the stores can restock. My daughter works at Target – she says the shelves are full of TP, Paper Towels, …. at 8am every morning, and they are all gone by noon.
But eventually people will have all the TP etc, they can possibly need.
We were told to be terrified because our masks were coming from China. But tens of millions of masks are being made in the US every week now.
Ford GM and Dyson are making Ventalators. These are more complex, if will take a few weeks to ramp up production – but they will, and soon we will be drowning in Ventalators.
Drug makers have DONATED enough HydroxyChloroquine to fully treat 50M people.
That is every know actively infected person almost 100 times over.
It is my understanding that lots of zythromax has been donate – with even more to come.
Everywhere you turn people and businesses are trying to help.
Some banks are suspending mortgage payments.
Strippers are delivering food – and a private show.
Very little of this has much to do with government
You bitched about government and testing – multiple companies have Covid19 testing available – from home, or from your car.
One takes 15 minutes – the other 2. And the only thing in the way of this has been government.
And you say government is the white night charging to the rescue ? And you do this at the same time you note that this is unlikely to help those who need help ?
So which is it Rick ? Is the Stimulus $2T down the tubes, or lubricating the already powerful and their sychophants ? Or is it our salvation ?
Can we put our thinking cap on ? It is not sufficient that we DO SOMETHING,. ‘
What we do must actually work.
Whether the Government is the white knight riding to the rescue or not – depends on whether anything it does is effective. Not the size of what it does.
If you come to the doctor with a blister on your toe – and he amputates your leg at the hip – he rscued you from the blister – so does that make him the White Knight ?
Dave, 1920’s there was one difference. Not only were taxes cut, gov’t spending was also cut.
Just try that today. There is no way any politician is going to risk not being reelected by cutting spending.
One only needs to look at the shit storm that eliminating the pandemic response team has had without anyone actually doing an in depth study as to that actions real impact on this pandemic.
And once they do it, if it shows that had a significant impact, all hell will break loose in the news. If the study shows the work went on by excess staff at CDC or wherever that work was done and there was no impact. it will be on page 10, 1/2 a column at the most report in a paper or never reported on any T>V> news report.
Times are very different than in the 20’s.
History (as well as logic, reason, and economics) informs us of what does and does not work.
If politics today precludes us from doing what works and drives us towards doing what will fail – then we need to fix our politics.
Trump has accomplished an enormous amount as president – some of which I disagree with.
Regardless, despite the constant attacks by the left and the media, despite an impotant congress, despite every possible effort to thwart him at everything and in every way despite his own constant tweeting and energy wasted in all this parrying he has accomplished more than Bush and Obama combined.
It is useful to consider how he has done so, and I would note that is a pattern that exists inside of his business life.
One major aspect of that is significantly restricting the number of advisors and decision makers.
This particular – as well as many other attacks on Trump are that because he has reduced spending or the number of people in some area he has diminished the ability to address problems. On the whole the opposite is true.
The free market is a constant cycle, the birth of small businesses, their growth often to enormous businesses followed by their death. I beleive the current lifespan of a fortune 500 company is 14 years.
Businesses are born to solve problems. they grow because there are real economies of scale, and they die because the larger they get the more unmanageable, unwieldy and unresponsive they are. Psychometric studies have found that over 60% of the managers of a business NEGATIVELY impact that business. That most businesses could get rid of 60% of their management and they would function substantially better.
More money often makes problems much worse and harder to solve.
More people makes problems worse.
In computing there is a Classic Computer Science Project Text that is more than 40 years old called “the Mythical Man Month” that analyzes software development, and how projects scale. Much of the book is an effort to work arround a software development problem discovered extremely early – that after a certain relatively low point adding more people to a project slows it down – often to the point of even going backwards.
There have been some colosal software project failures over the years – two that come to my mind are the Philadelia Water project, and the Denver Airport baggage handling system.
Both of these took decades, billions of dollars and failed. And the failures were from some of the largest and best companies in existance – IBM, Oracle. Yet each of these projects could have been done by a tiny fraction of the people in a couple of years.
This is not limited to software. Lockheeds “Skunk Works” over 60 years delivered some of the most amazing aircraft of all time on time and usually under budget. The P38 was the very best fighter of any kind until very late in WW2. The F104 was one of the best fighters in the world for decades. The U2 was developed in 1955 14months – and variants are still flown today. The SR71 was developed in 18months, flew for 50 years, is the most advanced aircraft ever developed, and still holds nearly all aviation records. The F117 Stealth fighter was developed in less than 24 months.
Core to the Skunk works was a small team of the best of the best, with the few good enough to be part of it having the power and autonomy to do their jobs as they saw fit.
You bitched about Trump for being over optomistic and then you try to sell FDR ?
Please tell me how FDR helped with the great depression ?
And while your at it – explain to me how Obama helped with the great recession ?
And please get your own rhetorical house in order.
Neither Obama nor FDR gave us anything but rhetoric. Each presided over one of the most protracted and painful recoveries in US history. On one hand you tell me that leaders must inspire us – give us hope – while Trashing Trump for doing exactly that, on the other you tell us that words alone are insufficient – after citing FDR and Obama.
You tell us that Trump’s assertion that drugs like Hydroxychloroquine might significantly improve things are poppycock, and you follow this by offering without the same disclaimers assertions that 3/4 of the population might get this.
Let me try this AGAIN. I do not know where this will go. What I do know is that the odds of everything playing out in the worst way is very near NILL.
There is no epidemic we have data on that has ever infected more than 27% of the population.
Not a single country has had more than 0.35% of its population infected todate.
Most of the world (including the US) is under 0.1%
Italy – one of the worst hit – has plateaued. it is a bit early to judge but it looks like the planet may have plateaued. Regardless there are very strong indications we are at or near the peak. In 5 days I could be proved wrong, but that is where things look at the moment. ‘
If that is true – this will not infect 0.5% of the population anywhere.
Lets say I am wrong – by a factor of 10 ! – that still means that your 75% prediction would be off by a factor of 20 !
We do not know enough to rule out the worst case completely.
But the probability is near zero.
If you are going to rage at Trump over optimism – where is the anger at the pessimism ?
Though I think I would express it differently I agree with your final note.
Even if the final result is 2M covd19 cases world wide and the deaths are a fraction of those of the yearly flu. This will have scared us, changed us – hopefully for the better.
It is my hope that several generations who have not had to deal with any real threat will gain some perspective.
As I have said before – we live in the best country in the world at the best moment in time (except tomorow).
We must never give up trying to make things better, but if we can not see how good they actually how we are more likely to make things worse.
We have lots of problems to solve – we always will have more problems to solve.
But we are unlikely to make things better if we suffer from the delusion that half the country is racist, homophobic, trans-phobic misogynist hatefule, hating haters.
It is my hope that confronting something truly bad – if hopefully only at a distance, will give us a clearer understanding that our differences are not existential threats.
Covid19 is a real existential threat – if only a small one.
I would further question “the wisdom of the earth”.
Gaia is giving us a lesson.
Life is not fair. It is outside the power of humans to make it fair.
We can strive for freedom, but we are only equal in death.
Yea, we can trust the FBI – things are different now, they have this new woods procedure that is being followed. NOT!
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/fbi-problems-fisa-warrants-goes-far-beyond-russia-case-doj-watchdog-warns
Since you insist on beleiving that the economy has nothing to do with Life and death – NBER found that a 1% increase in unemployment results in a 3.6% increase in opiod deaths.
If the projected unemployment from this is correct – that is almost 30,000 additional opiod deaths. That is 7 times the current Covid19 deaths. And opiods are only one drug that is abused to death – there are many other drugs – and alcohol whose use will increase dramatically – and that will result in more deaths.
Suicide rates increase as unemployment increases, violent crimes increase as unemployment increases,
And those are just some of the Easy increases to find.
And that does not include the vastly greater non-lethal damage done to people.
We are all looking to accomplish the same thing – to keep as many people alive and as well off as possible.
We are disagreeing on priorities – atleast partly because of the poor quality of the information we have. Potential policies that make sense with death rates in the 10’s of millions do not make sense with death rates or less than 10,000.
And we do not know where this will end up. But the odds arefar more likely for 10,000 than 10,million
https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/30/how-shutting-down-the-economy-much-longer-could-kill-tens-of-thousands-of-americans/
Dave: I can’t deal with 11 consecutive comments all at once. (Whew! I must have touched a nerve.) I’ll see if I can work my way through them later today.
No special nerves.
Your editorial covers alot of ground.
There is alot that I agreed with – SOME of which I noted, But mostly if I agree. I do not need to say anything.
One the rest – if I either strongly disagree or somewhat agree but wish to make a different point – I responded.
Read/dont Respond/dont as you wish.
Rick, this is just what I needed to read today. As Winnie the Pooh said (one of my favorite quotes) ” Sometimes, when I’m going somewhere, and I wait, somewhere comes to me.”
“But let’s hope this once-in-a-lifetime pandemic has taught us Americans that life is too short – and too great a gift – to squander by holding a grudge. ”
Ah, yes, Rick, these awful times have the potential for helping us to see the things that are really important and those that are not. Not sure that this potential is being realized, and, because of that, I have had some really desolate moments. But today is a beautiful sunny day, and hope springs eternal.
A few days back , right after I had been tested, but before I knew that I had the virus, I became hyper-emotional over “man’s inhumanity to man,” and found myself crying at the drop of a hat, over the casual cruelty of our political discussions here, and the general lack of civility in American politics that has torn us apart from each other. I typed out a long, emotional response to a comment that was posted here, angry tears running down my face the whole time I typed.
After spending 30 minutes typing the screed, I deleted the whole thing. Was this me? I thought (I am famously NOT a crier ), was it the effects of the fever, fatigue and fear that I was feeling over being one of the plague-stricken denizens of plague-stricken NY/NJ? I ended up leaving a snarky, angry response instead, and decided that I wouldn’t come back here until I was feeling more myself.
“We’re all transients here, so let’s stop squabbling and start enjoying our stay as friendly neighbors on this endlessly diverting planet.”
Ive often said that I like to discuss politics, because it interests me, and “squabbling,” per se, is not particularly harmful ~ squabbling, as in “Oh come on, you don’t really believe that, do you?” But, more and more frequently, “squabbling” has been more characterized by the “Eat sh*t and die!” arguments that have been put forth by politicians and the news media. And, yes, by us regular folks, as well.
In this time of plague, and potential economic ruin, this second type of squabbling is what carries with it the most potential to strip us of our essential decency and rational thought.
Priscilla, I am sorry to have triggered that and I hope you recover well and your family is spared any more covid repercussions.
I have tried to be objective about Trump’s actions and separate them from his personality. I have had some sympathy for his plight on covid which I noted here.
I have also developed a bag oftricks for not getting into it with dave and keeping my distancemost of the time.
I am scared to death for my daughter because of her work and inevitable exposure under poor condition s to this disease. Do you understand?
Trump on the global level and Dave here manage to hog bandwidth and smother every aspect of existence trump in the real world and Dave here.
They are both poisonous personalities to many people. To you they are admirable and critisizing them for some reason seems much worse to you than their own words. Well, I never will get it.
I can avoid tnm and Dave that is simple and up to me having some self discipline, but it’s hard to avoid life in the national culture and avoid trump.
Anyhow the world is full of beautiful kind admirable people and I and everyone would do well to avoid the human fascination with poisonous people.
Again I wish you a speedy recovery.
Apology accepted, Roby, and my apologies to you for biting your head off.
I know the feeling ~ I worry nonstop about my son in NYC as well as my other son who has been volunteering as an EMT. I didn’t even worry about myself, because I thought I was being so careful! You know, I’m here in the New Brunswick area, which is not as bad as North Jersey, but it’s quickly getting there. Being in the Covid epicenter of the world is no fun, that’s for sure.
I pray for your daughter’s good health as well as for your own. It’s an incredibly scary time.
Personally, I blame the ChiComs 100% for this, since it seems pretty obvious that they have lied about it from the beginning, and are still lying now, but the blame game isn’t going to do us any good right now. And the poor Chinese people are suffering as well.
Trump has not been perfect, but, in my estimation, he has risen to the occasion. On the other hand, that is clearly my opinion, and yours is very different. So, since we really don’t know how this ends yet, let’s be on the same side for a little while. ❤
I think Trump has made more mistakes than you – some serious.
But I do not expect perfection – particularly not from government.
Despite the mistakes, I think Trump has handled this better than
and presidents in my lifetime have handled a crisis.
No atheists in Foxholes! I’ll join you in praying for you and yours. Praying for each others families is a good way to overcome the political wounds.
I am remembering the parents of Teddy Roosevelt, His father was a proud Yankee, his mother was a Southern Belle. The Civil War put them on different sides and they both saw events from the North and South points of view, respectively, but they did not take it out on each other.
There ought to be one side here.
Robby,
I doubt that Rick, and I and Ron, and Priscilla would have any problem finding some common ground, or where we can not disagree – possibly brutally without getting personal.
I bet I could even have a debate on the issues with Trump without his resorting to personal invectives.
What is the purpose of any debate ?
To establish facts ? Truth ? Right and Wrong ? to determine courses of action based on those ?
Or is it to reach into your “bag of tricks” to deflect and avoid confronting difficult questions ?
What are the criteria for what is kind and what is poisonous ?
once again you spray moral judgement with the certainty that you are correct, but without any willingness to offer much less defend the foundations for that judgment.
This is precisely why we are so frequently in conflict. And it is why that conflict often becomes bitter.
You constantly lob moral hand grenades – are you completely blind to the fact that pretty much every post you make is laced with moral judgments, while rejecting the very legitimacy of discussing the foundations for moral judgement.
What is the value of anything you say – and particularly your moral pronouncements, if you have no principles forming the basis for what you say ?
You apologized to Priscilla for “triggering her” – well what “triggered her” ?
You actually argue that it is either outside your depth or interest, or evil itself to examine the basis for deciding what is right and what is wrong.
Philosophy is the systematic study of foundational principles.
Ideology is the study of those principles in action.
Priscilla: I’m devastated that you’ve come down with the virus; either I haven’t been paying attention on Facebook or this is the first you’ve mentioned it in public. You seem pretty fit and vigorous for a fellow boomer, so I trust that you’ll make a full and speedy recovery. I’ve prized your friendship ever since we reconnected for our 40th reunion.
I’m glad my latest was just what the doctor ordered. You make a good point about the two types of squabbling. I agree that life wouldn’t be as much fun without the more playful squabbles — I have fond memories of the animated late-evening bull sessions in my dorm at Rutgers half a century ago.
But this tribal animosity is something else entirely. I couldn’t believe the vicious response I got from one of our old classmates — a certain warmhearted but hotheaded blonde from Milltown — when I defended Ilhan Omar (of all people) for praising Trump. I’m still hoping that something good will come out of this pandemic once the partisans realize that we’re all in it together.
Please get well soon!
Rick, I kept the news of my diagnosis off of Facebook, precisely to avoid the kind of political firefight that you describe from my friend from Milltown.
Plus, I don’t want people worrying about me or thinking of me as a leper, so I figure I’ll “out” myself after my recovery.
And I am recovering, from what seems to be a pretty moderate case, so that should be relatively soon. It’s a bit of a roller coaster, but today is a pretty good day ~ I don’t know if its the sunshine or just that I’m turning a corner, but I’ll take it!
Stay well, my dear friend!
One of the fundimental differences – between us, and just generally, and one of the drivers of our partisanship, is
We are not all in this together.
We are all in this individually.
We get to choose individually how to address this.
We should be free with regard to ourselves were our impact on others is small.
Absolutely most of us do come together – but even that is a choice.
When you take away choice, you diminish us all.
There are people gathering supplies and heading off to hunting and cabins or isolated vacation spots.
For those who have that choice – there is nothing at all wrong with that.
It is nto something that all of us can do. And that is part of the point.
We do not all have the same choices, nor the same risks.
We ranted about 20 somethings partying at Spring break.
But aside from their being careful not to spread anything to grandparents,
why do we care ? The fatality rate for 20 something’s is a tiny bit higher than the flu.
We would arguably be better off if this burned through 20 somethings and left a large cohort of people atleast temporarily immune.
Conversely we should be totally locking down senior care facilities.
I can go on – but the point is that there is not one perfect shared community response that is appropriate for this. Each of us as individuals not only should be free to make our own choices – but we individually have completely different risks.
Should we be voluntarily coming together where necescary – certainly.
But the choices must be made individually
The reason that the left adopted Alinsky’s Rules of radicals – is that they work.
The reason that Trump has adopted them – is that they work.
The reason that our politic parties are increasingly bitterly divided – is that it works.
All of these things work – because we let them.
I think that Covid19 will ultimately prove to be little more than a bad flu season that we have radically overreacted to.
But whether I am right or wrong about that – it has scared us deeply, and it is likely to have as profound an inpact as 9/11 or the sinking of the Titanic.
In less profound ways it will change how we interact, the myriads of forms of communicating over the internet will become more important, more attention will be paid to being able to work from home. Many aspects of this will be a good thing. It will connect us back to our families more.
The more important question is how will this impact our values.
It is my hope that confronting a REAL threat will put all the faux threats we are so bitterly fighting over into perspective.
Yes, we should deal with a wide assortment of issues that we face, but nature has just bitch slapped us and reminded us all how puny we are and that it could choose to wipe us all out in a minute. And that it does not care if we are moral, or racist, or sexist, or caring, or ….
Life is fundimentally not fair and we can not make it so.
Dave “I think that Covid19 will ultimately prove to be little more than a bad flu season that we have radically overreacted to.”
If this becomes a bad flu, its only because of the actions taken. Look at NYC right now with these drastic controls. Spread that out across America. What do you see. Right now there are a few hot spots only.
My concerns. When this REAPPEARS in the fall,do we go back into isolation from Nov to April next year? FDA wont approve vaccine until at least June or July 2021. And will there be drugs to cure the elderly by fall. I doubt it.
So what happens when NYC finds 50 cases?
I understand your concerns about this reappearing.
But there is alot we do not know – and while there is reason to be wary there is no reason to be certain.
If there are 10 possible factors each of which has a good, and bad outcome. the odds of all 10 coming out bad are near zero. Conversely the odds of there all coming out good and significantly better.
The existance of life does not require everything to always produce the best outcome,
But it does require than bad outcomes are overall much less common than good ones.
“You are wrong”
“your ideas are idiotic”
“You are stupid”
“you are a liar”
“You are racist”
“You are a pig”
“You are evil”
Each of the above are things that are said constantly. Each has become deeply ingrained into our public discourse.
Only the first two are a legitimate part of an argument and they are not argument.
All but the first two are ad hominem.
Ad hominem is illegitimate in argument, both because it adds nothing to the discussion and because it powerfully deflects discussion from the facts to the personal.
We are powerfully drawn to respond to attacks on the person with counter attacks on the person and rational discussion ends.
Each of the last 4 is an allegation about the morality of another person.
Error regarding facts comes at the expense of our credibility
Error regarding moral claims about another comes at the expense of our integrity.
If you make a moral judgement of another person, you must not merely be right, you must prove you are right, and not to your own satisfaction but that of the vast majority.
You bet your credibility.
Excellent piece Rick. Not a word I disagree with.
Here in Vermont there are many examples of people being human, in the best way.
I’ve realized (yet again) how deeply the political and ideological poison has penetrated my brain and have once again rebuilt my defences against partisans and ideologues.the common sense and common decency of most people is a much better thing to let into my life.
Thanks, Roby. One of the most eye-opening experiences I’ve had in recent years was my Alaska cruise. My first impression of my fellow-passengers was “Looks like I’m in Trump country here.” I could tell from the accents that many (if not most) were from “flyover country” — and I was dreading the prospect of sitting down to dinner with them and making conversation.
Well, it turned out I liked every single person I chatted with. We were just fellow Americans enjoying a common experience and responding to each other in the most neighborly way possible. I would hope that the pandemic has a similar effect — that it will finally bring out our common humanity and make us all good neighbors again. Glad you’ve already been experiencing those good vibes up in Vermont. Stay well!
The gigs my band used to play at service clubes, I mean American Legions, VVWs, etc. put me right in the middle of trump country, if I had any doubts the bumper stickers in the parking lot would have cured them. Very warm friendly people to play for and they loved their 60s rock and roll.
Then why is nearly everything that you say a moral condemnation of those and others who are equally warm ?
And if you are going to rain moral condemnation on others – can you atleast have the decency to have a foundation for that judgement that is more consequential than “feelings” ?
I do to you exactly what you do to others. But I am prepared to, and have repeatedly justified my condemnation of your moral preening.
You do it so constantly in everything that I do not think you are even aware of it.
Rick;
The bitter partisanship is confined almost entirely to the left.
I do not mean to say that no one else is partisan, or holds strong political opinions,
but that outside of the left the vast majority of Americans at the very least tolerate and often revel in discussing their differences.
I can debate the bible with a fundimentalist christian. that debate might get heated, but it rarely if ever degenerates to ad hominem. But as you noted Rep. Omar can not ever remark that Trump ever did anything right without being brutally attacked. Often the left does not even know what orthodoxy and heresy are – but once determined – even the past needs rewritten. Recently, it was decided that Trump was “racist” for calling this the wuhan virus or china virus. I think that Trump reveled too much in torquing reporters when challenged on that. Regardless, once the decsion was made that Trump’s words were racist, the entire left instantly got on board. And those of us who have not locked out brains in a box had fun going back and finding the dozens of times those now attacking trump had called this the Wuhan Flu or China Virus.
When I debate christian fundimentalists – they like Robby lace much of what they say with moral judgment – but unlike Robby they are fully prepared to confront the foundational principles that drive those moral conclusions. And it is often possible to make small progress with a chritian fundimentalist specifically because you can directly address the principles that underpin their judgements, and when THEIR principles conflict with some of their judgments and actions they are prepared to rethink their positions.
That is absolutely never true of those on the left. It is nearly impossible to get anyone on the left to ever discuss actual foundational principles.
There is an attack here at TNM on partisanship – fine, but aside from some (alot) of power games, partisan is little more than ideology in pratice, and you can criticise if the practice and the ideology are inconsistent – which they often are.
Ideology is philosophy put into effect – it is driven by principles, and those principles and their underlying philosophy can be examined. And those principles and their underlying philosophy are the basis for right and wrong.
We can not have a functioning society if right and wrong are arbitrary. We can attempt to correct by argument a normative concept of morality that we think is wrong. But society is still possible if there are some errors in our normative concept of right and wrong – if our laws are imperfect. It can not function without any laws at all. It can not function where your concept and my concept of right and wrong are radically different and yet claimed to be equal.
Ideology is not a cancer. Bad ideology is a cancer.
Fundamentalists are wrong – but they know what they beleive to be true, and they are prepared to defend core principles.
Conservatives of various types are wrong about many things – but they generally know what they beleive to be true and they are prepared to defend core principles.
The modern left does not know nor care what it beleives, and has no underlying principles.
decisons about what is right and what is wrong are arbitrary, and change often with little notice. The left does not have any foundational principles to guide it with difficult questions.
You and I might wrestle with questions regarding how to deal with transexuals and high school locker rooms, or sports, but we have principles to try to sort out the answers.
Those on the left do not. Please give me a principled explanation why an MTF transexual trump’s feminists in the debate over sports participation ? Or bikini waxing ?
I am not saying the left reaches the wrong answer. I am saying they have no foundation for reaching an answer.
The lack of foundational moral principles is why you can not have a civil debate with those on the left. Absent principles to argue, debate MUST become fallacy – ad hominem or appeals to emotions.
Finally I would note that this lack of underlying principles is not unique to the extreme left – with a few rare exceptions it permeats the entire left.
On rare occasions I have been able to prod Robby into providing some of his principles.
I do not think Robby is on the extreme left, at the same time when pushed, the principles he presents are not principles, they are values. Values rest on principles, sometimes our values conflict those conflicts though troubling are not fatal. – our principles should not.
An example, I beleive Robby stated “not separating children from their parents” as a principle.
Clearly that is a value not a principle.
Do we incarcerate the children of murders with them ? Do we release murderers because we will not incarcerate their children ?
“not separating children from their parents” is a value not a principle.
As such it can not provide answers to our questions. Which should be obvious – because we may VALUE keeping parents and children together, but it is not a principle because it is not even close to absolute, and other factors are ALWAYS necescary to make actual decisions.
I am glad that you are able to see the good that is in the world as a result of this.
With respect to partisanship and ideology – you paint them as inherently evil.
Ideology and partisanship are constantly used as vehicles to power.
A parties success means control of government, of jobs, of power.
There is little you can do about that.
But beneath the crass politics of power, ideology is inherently about what is right and what is wrong.
Whether it is conservatism, progressivism, liberalism, socialism. communism, libertarianism, these are each assertions of the foundations of right and wrong.
Ideological conflict does not end short of near universal agreement on the foundations of right and wrong.
You personally CONSTANTLY make moral judgements. Even the post I am responding to has an underlying moral disparagement of ideology and partisanship.
Am I wrong in observing that you see these as immoral ? And that you are clearly casting judgement on anyone who disagrees ?
To be clear I am NOT challenging making moral judgments. I am pointing out that you do so all the time – so do I, though less so than you.
But there is one consequential difference. I am prepared to back up my moral judgments. Right and wrong are not fungible, or whimsical for me – I have a foundation for determining what is right and wrong, and I can express those principles, and you and anyone else can examine them and critique them. You make moral judgments of others but are unwilling to produce much less defend the principles on which you make those determinations.
You claim that philosophy does not interest you, and that ideology is inherently evil.
That is equivalent to saying that right and wrong do not exist.
Every ideology rests on some philosophy establishing principles that determine right and wrong.
Peaceful human social interaction is not possible without some fundimental common understanding of right and wrong, and the use of force – Government to impose it.
Put simply – it is childish and immature to make moral judgments without being able to defend the principles that are the foundation for those judgments.
Right and wrong do not exist as arbitrary concepts. They are inherently philosophical, ideological and we judge philosophies and ideologies based on whether they work.
And tribalism continues. Why in the hell should people in low tax states subsidize obscene spending in CA, NY, IL and other liberal states?
https://www.businessinsider.com/pelosi-salt-cap-taxes-repeal-stimulus-phase-four-economy-americans-2020-3
Because we’re all fellow Americans? I hope we can finally overcome the red state – blue state divide by the time this pandemic is over.
Rick, please. If California wants to spend and tax people out the waazoo, why should I, in N.C. pay higher federal taxes? I have no problem helping others. I do have problems helping others waste money. How about CA cuts their spending. When I lived in CA property taxes were high, most went to schools, schools in CA were close to best in USA. Now high taxes and not so good schools.
Sorry, not tribalism. Its state issue for state to pay. This is not a federal. issue.
My hope is that face with something that atleast resembles an actual existential threat many of us will get some perspective on the truly miniscule scale of much of what is claimed to be an existential threat today.
Russian Facebook adds are of no consequence compared to a virus that can kill you and you can do very little about.
Faux claims to a wide assortment of rights seem unimportant when nature can deliver a pestulence that destroys your job and threatens your life.
We live in the best moment of human existance – except for tomorow.
Maybe after the dark clouds pass we will notice the rainbow and grasp how good things actually are and that is life is not a right, then healthcare and respect are not either.
That some things must be earned.
The repeal of deductions for state and local taxes must stay.
States must justify the cost of their government to their citizens.
IF California can not convince its citizens that the benefits Government provides are worth the taxes paid then they must lower taxes and reduce services.
Not demand bailouts from the rest of us.
Mostly the Trump tax plan is good.
It is closer to a flat tax, with less deductions – and one large standard deduction.
It should be flatter still and have even less deductions.
But it is still good progress.
Your choices as to spending should be up to you.
An d not driven by taxes.
I drove past Walmart in Burbank yesterday.
A dozen Customers were lined up outside, staggered apart with space between them.
Three Walmart employees in face masks outside the entrance were regulating entry.
One of them was spraying shopping cart handles with disinfectant.
Another was offering handiwipes to those allowed inside – in small groups- matching the number of people exiting. The third was keeping the line from bunching.
Will Churches take similar precautions while the curve is flattening?
“Will Churches take similar precautions while the curve is flattening?”
Why do you ask incredibly stupid questions that you already know the answers to ?
There are perhaps two or three lunatic fringe churches in the US that are behaving incredibly stupid regarding this.
My Wife’s church has had a streaming service for shuttins for years. My Daughter runs it.
They switched to exclusively streaming weeks before any government recomended.
We have some minor issues in my country because we have significant amish and old order menonite. They are still meeting. They are ALMOST ignorant of Covid19. At the same time they are strongly socially isolated from “the english” – outsiders normally. So this mostly does not get into their communities. Or biggest problem is we have a very large retirement population, and a large portion of those are able and before this even traveled. When they pick this up it travels through them fairly fast, They are older so it hits harder. and most every retirement community has graduated levels of care until it reaches people who are in poor health and if it gets to them – most of them die from this.
So we have a disproportionate number of older people and a disproportionate number of deaths.
In fact I do not think we are seeing this outside of those communities.
There are about 100,000 churches in the US.
I think that maybe TWO have made the news because they are still holding in person services on a large scale – an you fixate on that ?
Most US churches have gone virtual.
Some are not holding services.
The vast majority of churches are quite small to begin with and family groups are distancing themselves during services.
Most of the churches that still hold in-person services are rural where in most instaces this has not arrived, and in most instances may never arrive.
In rural communities the average “social distancing” is in miles not meters.
Covid19 is unlikely to burn through a community of 1000 even if 50 or so gather together at a church on Sunday
Huh? If churches have already adapted to the situation, why are you bitching?
“Huh? If churches have already adapted to the situation, why are you bitching?”
You asked
“Will Churches take similar precautions while the curve is flattening?”
If you do not want an answer do not ask the question.
If you do not think there is a problem, why ask the question ?
You are just highlighting your own problem.
We do get it. You do not actually care what the facts are.
All you are looking for is the opportunity to malign those you disagree with.
Just more TDS.
And you do agree churches located in dense population areas Should follow “social distancing” regulations until the virus has reached manageable levels. Correct?
And do you want to lift regulations in rural areas for restaurants, bars, movie theaters?
“And you do agree churches located in dense population areas Should follow “social distancing” regulations until the virus has reached manageable levels. Correct?”
To agree or disagree, you would have to ask a clear unconvoluted and spun question.
I do not “agree” with most of the government regulation regarding this.
Outside of quarantining those actually exposed, and protected people who are seriously at risk and incapable of making choices for themselves, Government has no legitimate role.
But I “agree” that pastors of mega churches should not crowd thousands in for services.
As to the specifics of what should be done where – each entity should resolve that on their own, and each individual should decide on their own whether they will engage with that entity based on their choices.
Using churches resturaunts and theaters as an example.
If a fascility in a rural community with no Covid19 chose not to do anything – I am OK with that.
If a suburban fascility with only small numbers of cases decided to remain open but required unrelated patrons to seat themselves 2meters apart – that is reasonable to me.
In an urban area with serious infections – I would expect those fascilities to shut down, deliver, or operate virtually.
Further whether Rural Urban, or Suburban each of us should be free to decide for ourselves.
If I go to a resturuant and I am not comfortable with the choices them have made – I can choose not to dine there.
This is simple – leave us all free to make our own choices.
I think that mega churches that gather large #’s in crowded spaces are stupid – probably even rurally. I am certainly not attending a Mega Church.
But if that is what the Pastor chooses and that is what the parishoners choose – that is their business not mine. Though I would have zero problems with insurance companies refusing to insure the church and health insurance companies raising the deductable of people who recklessly expose themselves to high risks.
With specific respect to regulations – I do not want to lift rural regulations.
We should never have imposed ANY regulations. Or atleast not this broad shutdowns.
I want to make something clear.
I want people to have the greatest possible freedom so long as they do not harm others.
That is why quarantining people who have been exposed is justifiable – they are a risk to others.
But if people who do not know they were exposed wish to congregate in crowds with others who might also have been unknowingly exposed.
Even if I think that is unwise and would not chose to do so myself, it is still their right.
Finally, one size fits all nonsense does not work.
Every church, every person, every resturaunt, every theater, is different.
If the government worked out a 5000 page rule book – what are the odds that it would properly get the risks right for every instance ?
What are the odds people would follow it?
Common sense is NOT a basis for regulation.
It is a basis for each of us to decide on our own how to act.
There are crazy pastors, and there are crazy former nurses.
Wise people do not make widespread judgments based on a few crazies regardless of their tilt.
We actually have a shortage of medical personel at the moment – because we have shutdown the medical community too. Outside of those dealing with critical patients Doctor’s offices and hospitals accross the country are empty. And medicine is not a practice that can be done virtually.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/06/cbs-news-posts-fraudulent-video-icu-nurse-crying-over-poor-working-conditions/
“We actually have a shortage of medical personel at the moment”
Of emergency room medical personnel.
In general, patients have cancelled other non-essential appointments. And doctors and nurses in those other disciplines are retraining to assist emergency room procedures.
Also pharmacy flummoxes as medical prescriptions across the board have increased— hypochondriac syndrome? Getting meds at drug stores and clinics, etc. can be problematic. A friend just told us she had to wait in her car an hour and a half to get her Kaiser prescription ready for pick-up after ordering it by phone the night before.
“In general, patients have cancelled other non-essential appointments. And doctors and nurses in those other disciplines are retraining to assist emergency room procedures.”
First an iCU is not an emergency room. This is entirely different from emergency room medicine.
Next, you presume that because you imaging something could be true that it is.
Some Doctors and Nurses are “retraining” – frankly little or no retraining is needed. If you graduated from nursing school or medical school you have more than the skills needed.
And some doctors and nurses are moving from other areas to deal with Covid19.
But mostly they are just un or under employed. In fact accross the country there are hospitals that are empty – because there are no doctors and nurses and because there is no Covid19 in those areas.
While in places like NYC national guardmen are serving as nurses as needed.
Reality is always messier that top down planning or imagining.
“Also pharmacy flummoxes as medical prescriptions across the board have increased— hypochondriac syndrome? Getting meds at drug stores and clinics, etc. can be problematic. A friend just told us she had to wait in her car an hour and a half to get her Kaiser prescription ready for pick-up after ordering it by phone the night before.”
My daughter had surgery just before the “lockdown” – litterally the last day in our state.
She has had no trouble getting her meds.
Again the problems you describe – are true some places – but not in most of the country.
In the US so far 1 in 1000 people have been infected.
There are still far fewer Covid19 cases this season than cases of the flu and fewer deaths than from the flu. It is highly unlikely that Covid19 will reach the number of cases that even a weak Flu Season produces. In fact it is likely to be atleast two orders of magnitude less.
It is possible that Covid19 will kill as many people as a typical flu season. Though even that is questionable. It is highly unlikely that Covid19 will have the number of deaths of a bad flu season much less those of the Spanish Flu. It is probable there will be less deaths from Covid19 than from H1N1.
It is probable that when looking at the date rate for 2020 in the US Covid19 will not alter it one iota from a normal year.
About 8,000 people die every day in the US. Covid19 todate is 1.5 days of that.
I think most all of our churchs are online now. Might be a few 5-10 person gatherings, but none on the news like the idiot preacher in Louisiana. But on thing about stupidity, its cured by death!
Here are the experts for you
There isn’t actually any contradiction in the beliefs that (A) the virus is dangerous, (B) mass unemployment is dangerous, and (C) authoritarian government policies are dangerous. There needn’t be any cognitive dissonance holding all three at once; they’re not mutually exclusive.
Serious Question:
At this moment there are just over 900K reported case globally, and 210K cases in the US.
How accurate do you beleive that is?
Do you think the actual number of cases is double ? Tripple ? Quadruple the reported numbers ?
Whats happening in your state?
Here in N.C. we have had a record number of individuals trying to file for unemployment. They can apply online or via telephone.
So many losing jobs do jot have computer. State does not have staff to handle call volumn.
State has hired call center to handle calls.
Still the wait can be hours if you dont get cut off. Some calls drop off after 60 minutes and you have to reestablish time on the call que .
Once you finally get the app completed, your employer has 10 days to respond giving readon for job loss.
State then has 14 days to complete application and sends out first checks.
That is 24 days from the day the application is completed and some just got throughbtoday after being terminated last Friday, so to the 24 days above, add another 5 days, so basically a month without the first check arriving.
These people are already hitting the food banks, but they are running out of food since so many people are not shopping other than for themselves or friends.
Governments seem to have excellent systems in place until you need them.
I keep telling you. you are just trading one crisis for another.
Last week 3.5M people applied for unemployment, that number was something like 6 times the prior record for one week, this week the number is supposed to be 6.5M
I have no doubt state UC systems suck in good times. I have had to deal with them.
But there is no possibility they can scale up by a factor of 10 overnight.
You tell me we must lock things down – this is the consequence,
and next week the layoffs from big businesses hit.
We are looking at unemployment levels not seen since the great depression.
While I expect a quick recovery WHEN we get passed this, it will take longer for employment to recover.
At what point do you grasp that this is NOT an improvement.
Everyone can not work from home.
I do not give a shit if these people are nazi’s and refuse to care for jews.
They are caring for 65 people at a time that would not be cared for otherwise.
If they are making a political statement – SO WHAT!
If you are offended by the values of this particular group – you are free to refuse their care.
Government may not discriminate, though there is no evidence this group will, I do not care.
I do not care if they follow the policies and laws of NYC. I care if they save people’s lives.
https://gothamist.com/news/de-blasio-samaritans-purse-central-park-coronavirus-hospital
The impact of this more than doubles as you climb down the economic ladder,
But it is those at the top who are most anxious by far.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/coronavirus-hits-the-poor-hardest-but-the-rich-claim-more-emotional-damage
Well no one should be surprised by this. The one thing you do not ever do in the military service is go out of the chain of command under any circumstances, Period! I knew when I saw him at the press conference his career was over.
Just like MacArthur when Truman said “I fired him because he wouldn’t respect the authority of the president. I didn’t fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that’s not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail.”
In his 1956 memoirs, Truman wrote: “If there is one basic element in our Constitution, it is civilian control of the military. Policies are to be made by the elected political officials, not by generals or admirals.”
There is a chain of command, you do not violate that. From a Seaman to an Admiral, everyone follows it.
The other issue not being reported, but I bet it comes out in the future. You never provide any information to the public that releases operational readiness of any military asset. Once this became public, others not as friendly to us knew how this ship was compromised.
https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/watertown/ap-online/2020/04/02/navy-fires-captain-who-sought-help-for-virus-striken-ship
There are lots of problems in the military. Quite often the “brass” is complete idiots.
But you do not go outside the chain of command and embarrass the brass.
I thought the same – this guys career is over.
This guy is just like Col. Vindman, and eventually Vindman is in trouble too.
And it has nothing to do with Trump, it has to do with breaking chain of command.
If you are the capt. of a naval vessel – the navy is looking for leadership.
Do not get your vessel infected. If you do – figure out how to deal with it.
And make sure you can keep “fighting your ship”.
You probably have a great deal of maneuvering room – so long as you do not embarrass your superiors.
Conversely if you put the navy in a position were they even have to contemplate pulling a super carrier from ANYWHERE – you are FORKED.
Aside from the carrier itself – this is a whole battle group – no carrier, no battlegroup. Period.
This guy left the navy looking at the possibility of having to yank 1/12 of its capability.
Actually more than that – because we do not have all 12 Carrier Battlegroups deployed concurrently.
With respect to the House Armed Services committee – there is no “unique circumstances”.
The captain of an aircraft carrier is expected to be able to fight his ship with half the crew dying of the Plague.
I would further note – which is somewhat absent in this story, that on an aircraft carrier there is a Captain and an Admiral – always. The Admiral is NOT the commander of the Ship. He is the commander of the battlegroup. Crozier answers to that Admiral. And Crozier does not need email to talk with him. Whatever Crozier’s problems – he was either able to handle them himself or bring it to the admiral who was ON THE SHIP WITH HIM.
We do not know what actually happened, but my guess is that he did, and did not like what he was told. And that is what triggered the email.
No matter what Crozier went outside his chain of command.
I would further note that an aircraft carrier is NOT like a city, or even a country.
The captain is absolutely responsible for not just the safety of the crew but the readiness of the crew to do their job. If the flu sweeps through the ship effecting readiness – the Captian is responsible, if Covid19 gets on board – the captain is responsible.
A navy captain is god on the ship, he is expected to prevent everything preventable, and solve anything not preventable, whether it is actually solveable or not.
Priscilla, let us know how your recovery is going. Praying that it will be fast and that your family is doing well.
Priscilla, How are you doing?!!!
I set and watch how those that have no idea how hospitals conduct business with disgust. People reporting the news have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
Ventilators. Cost between $5,000 to $50,000 for top of the line ICU vents.
Hospitals have two category of expenses. Operating and capital expense.
For most healthcare systems, senior management will meet for up to a week reviewing line item budgets for each department. Most of the time, any line item less than a specific amount will pass without question. The specific amount is based on the hospital size. Anythin over that amount, the department manager needs to give support for the expenditures or the vice president over that department needs to support specific expenses, or those expenses are cut! Right then and there. At the end of the budget meetings, the budget is set. Every expenditure is documented. ( Unlike government).
Now for Cap Ex. Most healthcare systems have capital equipment committees. Senior management and doctors. Capital can be any one item equal to or over an amount like $5,000. Managers present their request, show how much revenue will be generated or how the item(s) support the budget for the coming year. If the item does not fit the ROI or mission of the health system, the money is not approved.
I can tell you with 99.9% certainty that if a manager would have presented buying 100-300 vents or more at a cost of $5,000 to $50,000 each and told the Cap Ex committee those would be excess, never used except for an epidemic, they would have been rejected and once that manager left, discussions on what that person had been drinking would have taken place.
Hospitals never buy medical equipment to store. For one thing, the technology today is outdated tomorrow.
The reporters thinking excess vents are practical just show their ignorance. But they are making political points. Guess thats the important thing!
Buying significant excess anything to deal with rare events is just never going to happen – and it should not.
You say we should buy excess ventalators just in case ? I can think of millions of different hypothetical but possible disasters and needs we would have in the event of any of them.
The nation would be filled with warehouses stockpiling goods we might need someday with the people impoversished – because they do not have what they do need today.
No Dave, I did not say we should stock pile vents. I am addressing all the idiot reporters asking why there is a shortage!
I am addressing their stupidity!
I am addressing their asking the question in public instead of asking in private, someone with some background ” should we expect a stockpile of vents” and that one person can tell them no and why.
But they ask so they think it makes Trump look bad and sometimes his team gives 5 minute answers to questions and never answer the question which does what they wanted.
Just because I expand on a remark you have made does not mean I disagree.
Interesting. And people say I’m an alarmist.
California Governor Gavin Newsom spoke to members of the media Saturday to address the state’s ongoing response to the coronavirus.
Newsom said he takes full responsibility for the state’s staggering testing backlog, and also said the number of people in the state’s intensive-care units rose 10.9 percent overnight, to 1,008.
In addition, the governor stated that he does not expect normal NFL or college football games to be played in front of full stadiums in the state of California later in the year.
“I’m not anticipating that happening in this state,” Newsom said. “We’ve all seen the headlines over the last couple days in Asia where they opening up certain businesses and now they’re starting to roll back those openings because they’re starting seeing some spread and there’s a boomerang. One has to be very cautious here, one has to be careful not to overpromise.”
One has to wonder.when will normal return. Sometime in 2021?
No i am not seeing these headlines – anywhere, if you have links provide them.
JHU has been showing incredibly small numbers of new cases in China for over a month.
It is entirely possible that information is wrong, but I have not seen evidence that is the case,
and I have been looking hard for it.
Here you go. Had to do another search and more popped up than before. Just searched ” gov newsom football games”
https://sports.yahoo.com/california-governor-gavin-newsom-doesnt-220157916.html
Nothing in the article you linked provides evidence that places that have relaxed are now seeing more Covid19.
I am trying to pay close attention to this.
It is an important peice of information.
i do not “know” the answer. But I do know that so far i see no data showing a resurgence.
Well other than China, everyone still has significant numbers of new cases.There can be no recurrence if there has been no end.
This site allows one to click on the country and drill down. Look at any country ‘s charts and the all look alike. Except for China. There is no way in hell that case chart is true!
https://virusncov.com
On another subject, it is going to be interesting after the Chinese have basically destroyed the worlds economies how much of the businesses they end up buying in bankruptcy fire sales.
Thank you for the link.
I did not check every country, but I have not seen one where there was a flare after restrictions were relaxed.
Whether that is the case or not is important to know. There have been several predictions that China or other countries that had gained control would lose it again.
I have been watching that closely.
there are problems because data from all over the world is of poor quality – even the US. It is near certain that there are atleast double the number of cases currently being reported.
It is also likely that in many countries political factors destort reporting further and that is true even more so of China.
But I do not see evidence of, nor do I think that china could hide a second wave.
While the left is making a huge political mistake trying to defend China and use it as another claim of racism against China.
My daughter is chinese and is very sensitive to the fact that SOME people are displaying extraordinary racism towards chinese.
But mostly we understand this is a failure of government. Xi has been disasterous in many ways. But most importantly he has retrenched China into greater oppression.
Regardless, China is not coming out of this unscathed.
You and I have constantly twiddled over buying things from China. Do you really think that americans are going to quickly return to past buying habits ?
I do not want government involved in the economy or foreign trade.
But I have no problems with consumers expressing their distrust of China.
And it will not take much for the consequences for china to be bad.
We have a poor picture of what is going on inside china. But there are strong clues that the Chinese are not happy with their government. I do not know exactly how long it will take – but I think the communist party rule of China is facing an inevitable if possibly protracted end.
Before Covid19 there was strong evidence of mfg flight from china – at the very least businesses were looking for more production diversity. A plant in Thialand incase there were issues in China. or moving back to a more automated factor in the US to shorten supply chains.
All that was before Covid19.
Absolutely China is in the midst of a massive pr campaign right now.
They are not stupid, they know their image is seriously tarnished – and that impacts the economy
And that is how it is supposed to work/
Dave “Do you really think that americans are going to quickly return to past buying habits ?”
if the only products in this country are Chinese, yes. You cant find a light bulb that is American made. They might be American companies, but produced in China. Most all antibiotics are Chinese and most OTC’s meds. And there are many other examples.
And American companies are not going to go where quality might be higher, but so is cost. Going back to light bulbs, if the package says it will last 2000 hours and it only last 200, who is going to send it back for a refund?
“if the only products in this country are Chinese”
We are seeing right now, the US gearing up to produce things that we previously bought in China or mostly in China. We are even fighting because things like Masks which were almost totally made in China 4 months ago are gearing up rapidly in the US and now europe and Canada are buying them from us.
Business makes money by producing what people want.
if people what light bulbs made in the US – that is what they will get.
One of the key elements to the free market is the pricing system.
It is one of the most important features. It is why socialism fails and capitalism is tremendously successful. But it is also one of the most controversial (as well as important) parts of free markets.
Prices are how we signal what we want and how badly we want it.
The price system is essentially the most perfect VOTING system ever concocted.
When you take an item to a cash register and buy it, you are saying that THIS ITEM and ITS attributes I want enough to pay the price, and I chose it over all the other items that might be similar. I choose the red tie over the blue – because I want red more, or the made in the USA mask over the Chinese one, or the less expensive one over the more expensive one.
Every producer of every product has created that product with the attributes they beleive will win they the most customers at the highest total profit.
If a producer beleives that consumers will discount the value of made in china produces – the prices will reflect that.
If there are no made in america products on the shelves it is because Consumers have decided that few of them will pay the price necescary for those goods.
If you are unhappy with the quality of product made in China – do not buy it.
If enough people are as unhappy as you are production will move to somewhere you are happy with.
Dave “If you are unhappy with the quality of product made in China – do not buy it.”
guess I will need to buy up some kerosene and kerosene lights if I follow that advice.
“guess I will need to buy up some kerosene and kerosene lights if I follow that advice.”
So we are not seeing copious amounts of masks and other medicial supplies suddenly being made in the US – because americans do not trust that they will be able to get them from China where they were buying them in 2019 ?
If you do not have an american choice for some product – it is because your and the rest of america’s past value of price was higher than that of origen.
Production moved to china – because of out past values.
If those values change – so will production – as it has.
Dave my last comment on this because your hard head will never let facts enter you dont want entered.
Light bulb manufacturers all move to China. After a year or so, people know a 2000 hour bulb last 200. They look around and all are cheap chinese crap. No other choice. So to light their homes, they HAVE TO (Forced) buy Chinese lights. No choice!
So just because American buy Chinese crap does not mean they would not buy sonething else if available.
Is that so hard to understand?
“Light bulb manufacturers all move to China.”
I provided links to several US lightbulb makers. If you want an bulb made in the US you can find one. That is not a requirment for my argument.
You are correct that Most lightbulns are made in china – that would be because the overwhelming majority of us picked price over all the reasons that you beleive we should not have bought light bulbs from china.
And that is exactly how the free market is supposed to work – producers produce products that meet OUR values. There are few US lightbulb makers at the moment because nearly everyone values price until this moment over “made in the USA”.
At this moment – that is changing – because our values are changing. Maybe permanently maybe temporarily. i do not know, and do not care. If we as consumers decide to buy US n95 masks or respirators, or gloves, or lightbulbs. I am fine with that – even if we pay more, even if we actually get worse quality – so long as we decide freely.
I am not fine with Trump, or the Feds or you, deciding that I MUST purchase in any specific way. So long as the market is free from government interferance – the market will reflect the ranked value of consumers. Many markets will be diverse – like breakfast cereal, where there are myriads of choices – one to near perfectly fit each persons values. Some will be less so and I might have to pay a price premium for the product that most closely reflects my personal values.
I am sorry that you have had these horrible experiences with light bulbs not lasting 200 hours.
I would agree that CFL’s in particular and LED’s to a lessor extent have not lived up to their hype – yet. They are not 20,000 hour or 100,000 hour bulbs, and they have too high a rate of defects.
But have found by most objective measures they are still superior to older Incandescent bulbs.
They may not last 100,000 hours, But they do last more than the 750-2000 hours that incandescents last. They have a higher failure rate than I would hope. But I still remember screwing in a new incandescent and getting a flash bulb rather than 2000hr light.
At about the same frequency LED’s fail in 200-500 hours. Put simply no matter how imperfect Cheap LED’s from China or anywhere have proven – they are superior to Incandescents.
The only serious problem I have with LED’s is that the cheap ones are not dimmable, and the ones that are dimable with a traditional dimmer do not dim nicely.
But the smart bulbs solve that – and much more, and will ultimately prove as cheap as incandescents.
Finally, for years I have been buying most of my lights from Costco. Recently I received an unsolicited check in the mail. It was my payment as part of the settlement of a class action lawsuit against an LED bulb maker whose bulbs Costco sold cheaply – because they rarely lasted the 20000 hours advertised. That LED Bulb maker was a US company, not a Chinese one. While I cashed the check, I was never truly unhappy with the bulbs. They were still a better value than the incandescents I used before.
If your experience has been different – I am sorry. But in my experience most of the “cheap” chinese goods I have bought – have been a very good value. Sometimes they are not, and I do not buy them again. Sometimes either because I need something immediately, or because I am willing to pay more for some feature of a product I buy from the US or Germany or …
Most of the time I pay little attention to where something is made, but I usually have a good idea that it will meet my needs and is a good value for the price.
“So just because American buy Chinese crap does not mean they would not buy sonething else if available.
Is that so hard to understand?”
I provided you with several links to US made LED bulbs since that is what you are constantly carping about.
You have always been able to buy them.
In a prior post I noted that I have bought US made LED bulbs cheaply from Costco in the past. I did not try to do that. I did not try not to do that.
Regardless, the internet exists, and I will bet I can find some company in the US making pretty much every commodity that you say is only made in China.
Those companies exist – so clearly you are right, some people are buying from them.
They do not dominate – so consumers must place a higher value in that “made in china crap” than you do.
No one has taken your choice away from you.
But you are seeking to take choices from others.
If not backing down when the facts unequivocally support my argument is “hard headed” – I plead quilty. But I think Woodpeckers should avoid your head – because they are going to get a concussion. The american made products you want exist, if you look for them, and are willing to pay a premium for them – sometimes. Like breakfast cereal the free market provides almost everyone with a choice that reflects their values. As Bernie Sanders likes to bemoan – dozens of different deoderants, when we should all just use the same one.
What the free market does not guarantee – is that YOUR preference, YOUR values will be reflected in the cheapest or most ubuiquitous product.
And I find nothing wrong with that. Neither you nor I are entitled to require that the market personally cater to our values, over those of our neighbors.
https://www.usalovelist.com/
Ok i searched. Could not find. Link me to American MADE light bulbs.
Honestly ? in the internet era you really beleive I can not find american made choices for everything ?
BTW there is even a class action lawsuit against an american LED bulb maker for false advertising – because there 20,000 hr bulbs only last a couple of thousand hours.
I Thought you claimed that was a problem unique to chinese junk ?
The fact is that pretty much All LED bulbs last much longer than CFL’s and Incandescent bulbs. Though few last as long as a very well made and expensive on could.
Many LED bulbs fail out of the pack or shortly after – as did an even larger percentage of incandescents.
Manufacturing a cheap low cost better product is difficult. With each generation LED bulbs get cheaper and better – regardless of where they are made. But even the first generation was better than incandescents – just not the 100,000 hour bulbs we were promised.
Today i can buy a 2 pack of any color WiFi LED smart bulbs for about 40% more than a 2 pact of good incandescents 20 years ago.
https://enlightenmentmag.com/light-bulbs/some-bulbs-are-still-made-in-america
I am not commenting on lite fixtures in that catalog! I bought Sylvania LEDS and I am probably one that complained. Clearly marked on the box was MADE IN CHINA! Sylvania is an AMERICAN company producing in CHINA!d
I
Bulbs,com will specifically let you search for bulbs made in the USA.
Sylvania LEDvance bulbs are made in the USA – not all Sylvania products.
Some are made in KY and some in PA.
The FTC – you seem to like regulators, takes a dim view of false advertising, and they have standards for what “fat free” “all natural” “organic” and “made in the USA” mean.
My Wife’s Honda was made in the USA, but I doubt every part was.
I buy products made in China that have parts in them that came from the US.
To my knowledge not a single country in the world aside from the US has designed a successful CPU as an example. Iphones are “assembled” in China, but designed in the US.
For most manufactured in China products, the portion of the purchase price that actually goes to China is small. A new iPhone costs about $1000, or that about $200 is the price of manufacture in China – the rest is the capital costs for the design, the rights, the transportation, the shipping, the marketing, the sales costs and US profits. Apple makes more in profit in the US than it pays for the manufacture of the product.
BTW that is also one reason our trade imbalance is greatly in error.
Because if an iphone is made in china for $200 and sold int he US for $1000 – then $1000 is added to our trade deficit as reported by government.
BTW the most common failures in both CFL’s and LED’s are heat related circuit failures NOT LED failures. the LED’s are good for 100k hours.
So if a CFL or LED bulb is “assembled” in the US and it fails prematurely, the problem is almost always a design or assembly issue. Driven primarily by cost.
Converting 110V AC to the DC needed by an LED light in a reliable way is difficult.
And gets much worse if you want it dimmable and low cost.
The simplest LED light design for US AC would be to connect about 90 LED’s in series.
This will not be dimable, and if the MTBF of each LED is about 100Khrs, the bulb will only last about 5K hours – because the whole bulb will fail if one LED fails.
Dimmable bulbs using fewer LED’s give us a much higher MTBF based on the LED’s but the tradeoff is more complicated electronics that has a higher failure rate than the LED’s – atleast today.
One of the big problems – also a problem for incandescent is surges and voltage and current spikes – particularly when you turn the bulb on.
When an incandescent bulb is said to last 2000 hours – that is burning 24×7, It will last a small fraction of that if you turn it on and off constantly.
This is also why low wattage incandescents last far longer than high wattage ones.
They have thicker filaments put out less light and can handle higher surges and spikes.
LED;s in DC lighting systems have incredibly long life. but we have not used DC for house power since Edison.
Regardless, the light manufacturers get better at this all the time – whether they are Chinese or not. You can expect that bulbs you buy next year will be cheaper, better and last longer than today, no matter where they are produced.
Well once again when the news gets out “Trump” will be the ne taking the blame. And its his watch. But I dont blame Trump, I blame total government incompetence!
Mnuchin meets for days with Pelosi, McCarthy, Shumer and McConnell and they devise a small business bailout. Its simple, right? You go to your bank, apply for a loan and you get it that day or shortly after. WRONG!!!!!!!
Most small business in America deal with small community banks. Most smalo community banks do not have a relationship through the SBA. Much of the SBA loans through banks are with the billionaire wall street banks.
So what is happening in N.C. in small towns across the state? Business owners go to there banks and are being told go to B of A, etc. They go to B of and because they dont have a relationship with B of A, they are basically told to go directly to SBA because we don’t want your insignificant business.
The SBA is not staffed nor ever was in its history to handle the volume of applications they are going to get hit with. And while they wait months for money, thousands of small businesses go bankrupt!
Dont these legislators have any intelligence to pass workable legislation or are they just interested in being able to say we passed a hill, workable or not.
Ron,
I have multiple small businesses, I have been running small busineses all my life.
I can figure out how to change the way I do business to mitigate the harm that the economic impact of this does to my businesses, I can figure out how to alter my business practices to keep the people who I work for, work with or are my clients safe.
I do not need, do not want and never have wanted government assistance with this.
Covid19 was unexpected – but dealing with the ups and downs – even the unexpected ones is part of business.
I have zero interest in this stimulus. I do not beleive it will work. I to do not beleive it can work. I do not beleive it is possible for govenrment to construct any aid program that provides assistance where it is needed without incurring sufficient additional cost to make it not worthwhile without massive amounts of corruption.
I do not beleive that it is possible for government to provide ne assistance at those times when I might want assistance through no fault of my own, without far worse negative impacts elsewhere.
Are you correct that there will be all kinds of examples of government failure regarding the implimentation of the stimulus – absolutely.
I not only assume that will be so, I know it will be so, possibly more than I know my own names.
The SBA should not exist. What small businesses need most from government is less government – less rules and regulations, less assistance to their larger competitors, Less, Less, Less.
I would not go to the government for a loan unless I KNEW I was such a high risk that no one else was going to loan me the money. Put simply, I would not borrow from the government unless I was such a high risk that I would not lend to myself if that were possible.
No these legislators can not pass workable legislation. Because that is a unicorn. It does not exist.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/03/a_tale_of_two_pandemics_142853.html#2
This article by Turley does a reasonable job of explaining the differences between the Federal governments power and authority in an epidemic and that of the states.
There are very specific areas that are the presidents exclusive domain – restrictions on travel accross our borders, National security in the narrowest sense.
In almost all other areas the primary authority and responsibility is with state and local government, and to the extent the federal government has any authority it is either to provide additional assistance or maybe to intervene where a state has failed.
There is not and probably can not be a national quarantine. It is also unlikely that the president can broadly quarantine individual states – even if they appear to have failed. Public health is very nearly constitutionally the exclusive domain of the states.
It is possible that the governor of Rhode Island can quarantine the state from New Yorkers – it is near certain the president can not.
The primary responsibility for hospitals and supplies lies with the states, not the federal government.
We listen to these daily briefings by Trump and all his advisors, But ultimately the President can not order a state to do anything, and has very limited authority to order the federal government to act within a state on a public health basis.
Trump talks about ending the nationwide shutdown, but rhetoric aside he did not and can not order it and can not end it. This economic shutdown is essentially each state governor excercising their actual authority to act as the president has recomended.
Governor’s are free to defy the president and not lockdown their states or to have different provisions than other states, and they are also free to continue their lockdowns regardless of what the president or his advisors might say.
Even in the area of supplies – the president uniquely can invoke the Defense production act, though that power is more substantial as a threat than in action as there is ample evidence from history that the more control government attempts to excercise on production – whether in a short term emergency or a long term situation such as a war, the worse it makes the problem it is trying to cure. Trump can rant at GM and Ford to make more ventalators faster, but actually stepping in will assure less and slower. Beyond the Defense production act the states are individually responsible for resources, They federal government has merely backstop powers to provide additional support to a state that has failed.
You or I can assert that the law should be different. but that is what it is.
So the claim that our drugs are all coming from China is “fake news”
https://reason.com/2020/04/06/why-you-shouldnt-trust-anyone-who-claims-80-percent-of-americas-drugs-come-from-china/
Hey guys ~ Typhoid Mary here!
My doc says I’m likely recovered now from covid16, but need to wait 2 or 3 more days without a fever, before I can consider myself non-contagious.
Anyway, I’ll be back in the fray, as soon as my energy is back! (This typing is a lot of stress on the fingers 😉 )
Good to hear! We can argue like cats and dogs, call each other names, but seems like we are concerned when something bad happens.
Save your finger energy for later. We have months to debate coming up!
Great news, Priscilla! I don’t even think of entering the fray here beyond the second or third day after I post. You’re a brave soul!
Rick is like the animal keeper that throws the red meat bones to the lions and then watches the fight over the red meat provided.😁
Great!
Glad to hear you’re ok…👍
Very wonderful to hear you are recovering! I hope your family did not catch it either.
Posting this in full as I received it…WSJ (unlike the NYT offing unlimited access for COVID-19 news) still fire-walled.
“Was Dr. Strangelove an Epidemiologist?
A doctor on the frontlines of the coronavirus crisis has special permission to tell the truth.”
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
April 3, 2020
“There is no price too high to save a life,” says New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy.
“We will not put a dollar figure on human life,” declares New York’s Andrew Cuomo.
These statements would be insane if anyone considered them seriously. Or take an icon of high-status wisdom, Bill Gates, who calls for a 10-week national shutdown in the Washington Post. He does not offer any cost-benefit analysis but he knows his audience: “Through my work with the Gates Foundation, I’ve spoken with experts and leaders in Washington and across the country”—i.e., people like himself.
The problem here is not an inability to think clearly. It’s an unwillingness to be seen thinking clearly.
Let’s understand something: The point of cost-benefit analysis is not the one that launched a thousand op-eds, to trade human lives for mere dollars. Its purpose is to help us weigh different kinds of harm against each other so we can achieve our goals at the least possible cost.
A voice of realism is UCLA’s Joseph A. Ladapo, perhaps because he’s a medical doctor who has been treating Covid-19 patients and has permission to be realistic. In USA Today, he writes that we missed any chance to corral a virus that will spare most of us but kill thousands. The shutdowns if prolonged will only make our situation worse. They will add mass unemployment, poverty and missed schooling to our problems.
“The epidemiologic models I’ve seen indicate that the shutdowns and school closures will temporarily slow the virus’ spread, but when they’re lifted, we will essentially emerge right back where we started. And, by the way, no matter what, our hospitals will still be overwhelmed.”
The alternative, contrary to much lazy thinking, is not the “let it rip” scenario. Politicians couldn’t mandate doing nothing if they wanted to. The American people by now are fully engaged: They will be wielding 300 million scalpels to cut the most high-risk interactions out of their lives, and likely more efficiently than any one-size cower-in-place order from the feds could achieve.
This is not a libertarian antidote. The government has a role to play in making testing universally available, beefing up hospitals, boosting supplies of masks and gloves.
Readers for weeks have asked if the virus came from a Wuhan weapons lab, an inquiry now raised in the Washington Post. My answer: A bioweapon is unlikely but bat viruses have been an interest of researchers since the SARS outbreak in 2003. A careless researcher is more likely to have been involved in the jump from bat to human than somebody who had no reason to be messing around with bats in the first place.
There is much that we don’t know, and much that we know that probably is wrong, thanks to Chinese dissembling. Fresh reporting points to renewed shutdowns in certain Chinese cities and counties, unrecorded deaths, uncounted infections, a leaked CIA warning to the U.S. president that Beijing’s claims can’t be trusted.
The World Health Organization may have much to answer for, its officials having rushed to lend credence to China’s boast of having quashed a flu-like disease when it was already loose in a population of 1.4 billion. “It’s long been thought that transmission of viruses that cause influenza-like illnesses can’t really be stopped,” says the respected medical site StatNews, implying that such “dogma” now can be discarded.
This may be the miscalculation of all time, with high consequences for countries that have taken China as a model. Far from certain is whether cooping people up at home hasn’t just aided the virus to find its most vulnerable victims. Our nagging of young people may be exactly wrong according to immunologists who see only one endgame: mass exposure and mass immunity to reduce the virus to a recurrent nuisance.
Our bodies are home to trillions more microbes than human cells. The purity of our essence may not be protectable.
Donald Trump is mocked for invoking the most ancient of medical advice, “do no harm,” i.e., don’t let the cure be worse than the disease. He was right when he called himself a wartime president, and may have taken a turn for the worse when he decided the solution for him politically and personally is to start talking about saving lives without regard for the cost to the 71% of our workforce who can’t work from home.
I keep thinking of Omar Bradley before D-Day warning his troops that pols back home were exaggerating potential casualties to ward off blowback on their own careers—tommyrot he called it. “Some of you won’t come back,” he told his men, “but it’ll be very few.” Many things are worth doing; many risks are worth taking, and many are worth avoiding. It would be great to have more clear thinking about which is which in our present crisis.
##
Interesting article.
There is much in it – what do you agree with ? Disagree with ?
Generally, I think it is good.
Some nits – Yes, letting people work this out on their own is “the libertarian antidote”.
Even the areas that Lapado claims government has some role in – is wishful thinking.
Government can not act fast enough, efficiently or effectively.
There is no system in existance that beats free markets at meeting peoples wants and needs. We have looked at everything – nothing works as well.
We are already seeing that free markets have responded – myriads of items that are still in short supply only are so because of government regulations.
Aparently you can tell people how to make a mask on facebook, but if you produce them en mass – you must have FDA approval – because they are a medical device.
Aparently a private esearch lab has found 5 antibodies that the developed to fight SARS all work – WELL against Covid19, but they will not be available until September – because of the extensive testing that they must go through, and then they will only be available for medical staff and extremely ill patients. That despite the fact that this treatment is expected to be a CURE. You get a shot and 8-12 hours later the virus is gone.
So why is testing going to take so long ?
One of the problems is exactly the issue that the WSJ article addresses. The value of human life. The concept that you can not place a value on life is absolute idiocy. It should be obviously false to anyone. We all make life and death choices on occasion. We do not like to, but they are not avoidable. When resources are limited – who do we save first ?
How heroic a measures do we take to save someone who is going to die one way or the other soon enough ? The idea that we do not place a value on human life is insanely stupid.
Of course we do. It is a high value, but a value none the less. If you are uncomfortable expressing it in monetary terms – we still tend to favor the young over the old, those with greater chance of survival over those who do not. Those are value based choices.
Beyond that there is this idiocy that there is something distinctly evil about monetary value.
Money is a MEASURE of value. It is not actual value. It is the means of measuring our preferences – our values. The price of something is quite litterally the numerical reflection of our value of that thing.
It would not matter if the value was expressed in Dollars or Euro’s or just magical comparison units. So long as a price of 200 meant we valued that item 10 times more than an item with a price of 20. It does not matter if the unit of measure is dollars, or seashells or bitcoin something that only exists as a matter of beleif.
Rather than run from placing values on life we should run towards it. Because once we have such values, decisions are easier to make.
Such as how much of a risk are we willing to take on some experimental Covid19 treatment ?
There are 40 vaccines available RIGHT NOW, they are all in early stages of testing,
If we took each vaccine and tested it on 10,000 people right now – in a month we would know which were safe and which were not, and which worked and which did not ?
Perfectly – probably not.
But that would involve testing on 400.000 people. And vaccines do not work on people who are sick so you have to test on healthy people. And if you test now on 400,000 people – some are going to be killed by the testing – really. It is near certain that atleast some of these proposed vaccines, even if they work will kill or injure some people.
The Swine Flu vaccine left 400 people (out of several million) paralyzed. It also likely saved 10,000 lives in the US.
400 paralyzed vs 10,000 lives – that is a value based choice, it is placing an actual value on human life.
Right now we should entirely dispense with the FDA and regulations. We have centuries old and more effective means – that work in emergencies when regulation does not.
They are called contracts and torts.
As for volunteers. get the best informed consent you can get – becausw we do not really know what the risks are. We can pay them to be guinea pigs. We can offer them insurance – if the eperimental vaccine kills you – your heirs get money. If it harms you, you get some reasonable disability based on they harm.
This type of accelerated testing WILL Kill people, and it WILL harm people. There is zero chance that 40 potential vaccines tried on 400,000 people will go perfectly.
But it is near certain that we WILL find an acceptable vaccine, and we WILL do so much faster than by complying with the FDA, and we WILL on net save enormous numbers of lives.
The approaches are different for treatments – testing an experimental drug on a sick person is much more acceptable than testing a vaccine on a healthy one.
right now 2/3 of people with Covid19 on ventalators WILL DIE. Why are we not aggressively testing experimental treatments on people who are near certain to die otherwise.
Many of these are people who were going to die one way or another – most Covid19 deaths are people who were in the last 6 months of their lives.
Again we can not test experimental treatments on people without their permission.
But who doubts that plenty of people would give their permission ?
If I was teminally ill – NOT with Covid19, I would willingly allow doctors to try long odds treatments against pretty much ANYTHING on me. I would allow them to give me an experimental Covid19 vaccine and then expose me to Covid19 to see if it worked.
Human life has a value, and it is not until we grasp that that we can start to make better choices than we get from FDA or government.
We must respect – that as with breakfast cereal, automobiles and deodorant – the value of each human life is NOT the same. But that is not an impediment because free markets are VOLUNTARY.
Not to worry … Trump promises to oversee the distribution of the money…
‘WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has removed the inspector general tapped to chair a special oversight board for the $2.2 trillion economic relief package on the coronavirus, the latest in a series of steps Trump has taken to confront government watchdogs tasked with oversight of the executive branch.”
https://apnews.com/cc921bccf9f7abd27da996ef772823e4
All those who believe in their hearts and souls that Trump won’t have large sums of money transferred in ways that benefit Trump… raise your hands 👋
More idiocy. Did you actually watch the linked video ?
The constitution does create checks and balances. Yet nowhere in the constitution is an inspector general ever mentioned.
As a practical matter, neither Trump nor congress will be effective in oversite.
Because they hav e designed something with enormous moral hazzard.
It is already being “abused” – it can not possibly not be.
I warned you repeatedly from the start than the beneficiaries of this would be the politically connected.
Do you still doubt that ?
Do you honestly beleive that it would make a difference whether Trump Or Obama was overseeing this ? Need i remind you of Solyandra – or the numerous other missuses of ARRA to benefit cronies ?
Will Trump cronies benefit ? Probably.
But is there the slightest doubt in the world that Hunter Biden, Devon Archer, … will be swilling at the trough one way or the other ?
Purportedly this provides that no elected or appointed person in government or their immediate families can benefit – so there will be another layer of corruption between the Bidens and their ilk and this swill.
Who here has the slightest doubt that this lard is going to the most connected – one way or another ?
The solution is not an IG. We already know that most of them are pretty inept and political.
The solution is for our political classes to NOT act stupid.
We do not need money. We need government out of the way of the economy.
And out of the way of our healthcare.
There is not a problem Covid19 creates that can not be better addressed by individuals than by government.
I am absolutely for real oversite. Though the consistancy of quality in IG’s has been known to be dubious for a long as we have had IG’s.
Regardless, if you wish to reform the IG system – be my guest.
As to corruption in the $2.2T stimulus – I fully expect it will be rampant.
It already is. Aparently mortgage processors are being overwhelmed with requests for mortgage forebearance. They are required to process these expedititiously, they are not paid to do so, and they are not allowed by law to inquire into whether there is a real basis for the request. Next, though this is being offered as a loan or loan forebearance, the expectation is that the loans will be forgiven.
So we have a law that has created massive moral hazzard.
No IG can fix this.
And Congress – both Republicans and Democrats are lining up to do even more.
Has Trump F’d up here ? Yup. McConnell, Schumer, Pelosi, … all too.
Each party is fighting to see who can Fork Up the most.
This is a shitty idea. Get government out of the way. Trust people.
There will be a few idiots, like the mega church pastor, and teens at Spring Break.
So what ?
All that exposes is the moral hazzard created by your Forked up medical system.
When you free people from the consequences and costs of their choices THEN they make bad choices.
This is part of the problem with politics.
Unions are a legitimate part of free markets. When employers do not respond to the needs of their workers they get unions, and that is appropriate. Conversely we know that unioized workplaces are less productive and highly vulnerable to competition.
Regardless, Government should have no role in unionization aside from assuring that societal norms are followed – that neither employers nor unions use violence to acheive their goals.
This gag rule is stupid and quite obviously unconstitutional.
The law is not about neutrality, it is a typical modern leftist effort to silence whatever viewpoint they do not like.
Absolutely unions should have the oportunity to inform their employees of the benefits of unions. But who in their right mind would trust the advocates of anything to be the only source of information for those making a choice ?
Even here are TNM we here cries to Silence disfavored groups. We here “the Russians” The Russians – as if hundreds of thousands of americans votes were changed by bad russian social media advertisements.
The quintessential argument for free speech in the past has been “who decides”.
Today we know the answer – the left.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/07/union_provision_was_secretly_slipped_into_covid-19_relief_bill_142881.html
There is significant evidence from actual use that Hydroxychloroquine is effective.
https://abc7.com/health/la-doctor-seeing-success-with-hydroxychloroquine-to-treat-covid-19/6079864/
How easy is mail in voter fraud ? Easy.
https://www.insidesources.com/mail-in-ballots-make-voter-fraud-easy-i-know-because-i-did-it/
Doesn’t sound that successful – one out of three tries? A decade ago?
If mail-in votes are allowed in significant number a much higher percent of phony votes than would be detected now with modern forensics. And to even try to accomplish significant voter fraud damage you’d need to set up significant operations in swing states.
“Doesn’t sound that successful – one out of three tries?”
2 out of 3 – she filed 3 times – 2 fictitious names and once under her real name.
We would expect the real name to get approved.
Both fictitious names should have been on lists of names to be suspicious of.
One was rejected the other not.
In both cases she did not provide drivers license numbers of SS#’s – in other words she provided no verification of anything – not that she existed, not that she was alive not that she was a US citizen. Not that she was eligable to vote.
“A decade ago?” and Hanah Arent is still on the voting roles and could have voted absentee in each of the last 10 elections.
And nothing has changed in the past decade. Enforcement is no better, no laws have changed., This is as easy today as then.
“If mail-in votes are allowed in significant number a much higher percent of phony votes than would be detected now with modern forensics. And to even try to accomplish significant voter fraud damage you’d need to set up significant operations in swing states.”
In the 2000 election about 300 fraudulent votes in FL could have thrown the presidency either way.
The Franken/Coleman election was decided by 2000 votes,
In 2018 several dozens of house elections elections and about 1/3 of the senate elections were decided by 1% of the vote – in several cases elections were decided by a few hundred votes.
While no one credible claims the Georgia Governors election was close enough to be altered by fraud, There were more than 1000 suspicious mail in ballots for a house seat won by 900 votes. In georgia it is illegal to handle the mail in or absentee ballot of someone else.
In California the ballots that were probably illegal and fraudulent are LEGAL – and there were 2Million of them. It is well known that Mail In ballots altered the outcome of every single GOP loss in CA. It is well known that counting only the inperson votes in CA house elections – Republicans would not have lost any seats in CA.
The odds of democrats flipping every single seat they won in mail in ballots without fraud are near zero.
Further this article addresses just about the least common and hardest from of mail in voter fraud.
The most common is getting REAL people to register, filling out their ballots FOR THEM, and mailing them in FOR them. That is incredibly common.
In a few states – mostly republican states that take voter fraud seriously,
a person must apply in person for an absentee ballot. there are special provisions for people who are actually unable to do so. But those provisions do not permit people representing one party or another to handle ballots.
Typically those states serious about voter fraud make it illegal for anyone to assist another person in voting who is not closely related to that person.
And even in those states there is plenty of documented voter fraud by mail in ballot every year.
Every single state that has switched from in person voting to exclusively mail in voting has flipped from Red to Blue.
We can argue about what specifically that means, but it means something.
Btw, Trump votes via absentee ballad.
So?
His state sets voting rules.
Read the constitution. States control the methods of voting, not the feds. He can not delay nor change election, only congress can delay it.
So come Jan 20, 2021, he and Pence are gone. Constitutional succession kicks in. That is speaker of the house. But Pelosi is out also because her term ended Jan 20. So next is Chuck Grassley, senate pro tem. But 23 republicans term ended Jan 20, leaving the democrats in majority of a short seated senate. So when they come back on Jan 20, Pat Leahy would be president pro tem. but is he until governors pick replacements? And since all house members term ended Jan 20, governors would have to pick replacements until the rescheduled election. Many would pick the sitting reps, but what would happen in states where governors were out Jan 20th. States would be doing the same as feds for succession.
I voted by Absentee Ballot in 2018. I was in New Orleans on election day.
I had to go to the courthouse two weeks in advance. I had to present photo ID, I had to sign lots of documents, I got to fill out my ballot in private. I had to seal it in an envelope. I had to seal that envelope in another envelope – that process had to be witnessed, I and the witness had to sign the outside of the 2nd envelope. This is far more complex than in person voting – and slower. The double seal is so that no one but me sees my ballot, and so that I can certify that the contents of the envelope are my ballot, while at the same time maintaining the privacy of the actual ballot.
That is NOT the process used by states with Mail In voting.
It is also not the absentee process used by most states.
Had CA and Georgia used rigorous standards like that – no one would have questioned the outcome of elections in CA and GA in 2018. And probably the results would have been different.
It is not merely important that we prevent actual voter fraud – whether in person or by mail.
It is possibly more important that we thwart the perception that fraud is possible.
It does not matter whether that perception is based in fact – though it is.
Bush’s early presidency was weakened by questions about the 2000 FL election.
And that is how it should be.
We do not want an outcome that voters are suspicious of.
That goes for the 2016 election too.
But the problem their is that the left beleives that the election was “influenced” by something that not only can not be prevented, but should not be, and that really did not happen.
Assuring peoples confidence in elections is important. But when those we need to insure are essentially bat shit crazy and seeking to change the voting process in an impossible fashion.
Stopping foreign nations from expressing an oppinion covertly or overtly regarding US elections is impossible
And it can not even be attempted without violating the actual rights of americans.
Further the position of the left runs dangerously close to any voter who voted differently from our desires is by definition influenced and their vote should not count
That is not a solveable problem.
While the lack of confidence that all the votes cast we cast by real people. reflecting their actual vote – that is within the realm of what we can do.
We can not keep people from voting in ways we think are stupid or being “influenced” in ways we do not like, but we can make sure that however they vote – it is their vote, they only get one, and that it is not altered and counted.
Jay, Trump has crossed my line of unacceptable decisions.
When you have a carrier group captain basically announcing to the world that the only carrier group in the south Pacific is not fully operational, he gets fired for probably multiple different issues, the sailors go as far as they can short of rebellion and then Trump fires the person firing the daptain. Trump has now put the whole disciplinary procedures of the military in jeopardy.
I have agreed with most everything he has done, but this one goes way over the line of acceptable.
Ron. I’m on my second glass of Costco Canadian Whiskey (only $18 a bottle!) and im not registering what you’re upset about? The firing of the ship’s commander or the guy who criticized him with the crew?
Ok, here is a three glass description!
Ships captain ‘s action warrant removal
Acting Sec of Navy fires captain for cause. (Everything good so far.)
Public outcry over firing. Sailors do their “demonstration” in support of captain.(OK, still good)
Trump fires secretary over firing of captain (Wrong!)
So whats Trumps next move. Ordering the captain back to his old post?
This just undermined the whole military chain of command.
Ron: “Ships captain ‘s action warrant removal”
Which action(s)? Sending multiple copies of his email complaint?
“Trump fires secretary over firing of captain (Wrong!)”
Trump fired him? I thought Modly voluntarily offered his resignation? And if the ship’s captain warranted removal, wouldn’t Modly’s inappropriate behavior at the ship, publicly berating the captain and crew, warrant removal too?
And the captain’s leaked email apparently accomplished it’s purpose. As of today nearly half of the crew has been taken off the ship, and the number COVID cases has risen from the 15 the captain cited, to 235 testing positive.
I already commented when he was first fired.
He went out of the chain of command.
Enlisted get courts marshaled
Ship captains get fired.
Been that way since this was just a fledgling country
Captains get court martialed too.
I doubt that is in Croziers future.
But his carreer is over.
Super Carrier captains go on to be admirals.
The next rank above Captian is Rear Admiral.
The Roosevelt it NOT a supply ship. It is not a Frigate.
Crozier is an actual Captian – meaning that he is Both the captain of a ship, and a captain in the navy.
The ranking officer in lessor ships is not usually an actual navy captian. though the ranking officer in a ship is always called captain – even if they are an ensign.
“Which action(s)? Sending multiple copies of his email complaint?”
Yes, that is sufficient.
His job is to solve the problem not to risk drawing public attention, and to risk that attention diminishing the readiness of his ship
“Trump fired him? I thought Modly voluntarily offered his resignation? And if the ship’s captain warranted removal, wouldn’t Modly’s inappropriate behavior at the ship, publicly berating the captain and crew, warrant removal too?”
We agree.
“And the captain’s leaked email apparently accomplished it’s purpose. As of today nearly half of the crew has been taken off the ship, and the number COVID cases has risen from the 15 the captain cited, to 235 testing positive.”
It did, but that purpose was at odds with his duty.
3000 people were removed from the Roosevelt, a very serious disruption of the navy that will have broad impacts on readiness elsewhere.
The replacements came from somewhere. They are not available for the task they were performing at the time. It is likely they are from the crews or reserves for other carriers.
There is not alot of superfluous personel in the navy.
It is likely that every crew in every supercarrier throughout the navy will have small negative impacts on its readiness for months as a consequence.
And that is merely one problem. As Modly noted when firing Crozier – the number of people he emailed – about a matter that really was his personal responsibility on the ship, virtually assured it would be made public.
Public means more than that CNN knows about it.
It means China knows about it.
It means that China would inevitiably find out that A US SuperCarrier was vulnerable, and might take that moment to exploit that vulnerability.
That COULD be an attack. It also could just result in Chinese efforts to bluff or threaten to push arround a US battle group to see if they could trigger an embarrassing failure.
The state of a Super Carrier is supposed to be always ready. If it is not, no one outside the navy is supposed to EVER know. Because that knowledge is a serious threat to the US national security.
I beleive Trump has already indicated support for Crozier’s firing – as has Chairman JCS.
Modly resigned because of the negative response to remarks he made to the crew when he flew to the Roosevelt.
I think his remarks were accurate, but better left unsaid.
At the same time the crew of the Roosevelt has stained themselves forever.
The entirety fo the current navy will remember the roosevelt Crew as being pansys that could not do their job under a bit of adversity.
This is a big deal. It is a reputation that will stick with the current crew and poison that of future crew. The navy is NOT particularly forgiving. And I do not mean the brass. Naval crews are highly competitive – A ships crew may remain close through retirement into old age.
The Navy a few years ago took the mothballed super Carrier USS America and used her as a target ship to determine the strengths and weaknesses of Super Carriers so that they could make the Ford class carriers even more durable.
It took 4 weeks to sink an undefended super carrier. Nose every antiship weapon in the US arsenal was used. No US Carrier in WWII was hit anywhere close to as hard or with as much ordinance.
Still the former crew vigorously protested. This was their ship. That ship was part of their personal identity.
The Roosevelt is likely to be remembered by other crews for a long time as the pansy’s who could not deal with a virus.
I doubt Croziers crew are going to be so supportive of him in a couple of years after they have been the butt of jokes and derision throughout the navy.
Everyone should remember the navy is NOT the same is private citizenry.
Crozier undermined the military. Not Trump.
If you want me to have sympathy for the position he was in – I do.
He was in a tough spot – and apparently not one of his making.
But you get Captians stripes in the US navy and command of a Super Carrier because you are expected to handle tough spots what would destory most people with ease.
I suspect Capt. Crozier is an incredible leader. A great person. And has a bright future – but not in the navy.
But that is NOT enough to be captain of a super carrier. Dealing with a covid19 outbreak without effecting the readiness of your ship and without showing any public sign of a problem – that is the requirements for a captain of a super carrier.
BTW I would not that Sec. Modly – even though he outranks Crozier is NOT subject to the same high standards. He is a civilian appointee. The standards of conduct and leadership he is subject to are NOT the same.
Ron, the Navy Sec., Acted independently.
He did not contact Trump or the whitehouse.
He also acted properly.
I could care less whether Crozier was “popular” with his crew or they opposed this.
I would suggest watching the Caine mutiny again – espeicially the very end where the attorney defending the crew in court rakes them over the coals essentially telling them they are lucky – because he would have convicted them all.
Crozier commanded a supercarrier. Not some supply ship.
There are only 13 of those in the world.
Typically only half of them are deployed at a time.
Crozier does not appear to have been responsible for the decision that brought Covid19 onto his ship. But he was responsible for containing it, and for maintaining the state of readiness of his ship NO MATTER WHAT.
The Navy Sec who fired him has subsequently resigned because of his remarks to the crew. Those remarks were tone deaf and innappropriate. But they were correct.
The Captian and his crew are expected to do their duty – even if a hypersonic missle is headed at them. They are expected to do their duty even if the ship is hit by a hypersonic missle.
It was Croziers job to contain the outbreak – and a warship is NOT a “free country”.
Sailors have very limited rights – that is how the military works.
Failing to contain the outbreak, it was Croziers job to in one way or another maintian the readiness of the ship.
Instead this country has had a carrier battle group unexpectedly removed from service.
The navy has had to remove 3000 of the crew – of whom only 155 were infected,
and replace those with people who were not expecting to be deployed.
This has negatively impacted the US’s readiness accross the fleet.
And it was Croziers job to prevent that. Captians are responsible for everything on a war ship. They are also responsible for dealing with anything that might happen.
Now was Crozier an “ordinary” Captian. He was not merely a naval acadamy graduate but one of a tiny number of naval academy graduates that rises to captain a super carrier.
That does not occur unless you have demonstrated incredible leadership and ability to deal with problems, even crisis at more junior levels. Crozier was supposed to be the best of the best. Had he completed his tour as Captain of a Super Carrier he would have been on the fast track to being an admiral. He was in rarified air. This is not some bosuns mate.
These are the very very few people we demand the pinnacle of leadership.
If the Roosevelt was sent to the South China Sea or to the Taiwan Straights – both dangerous places to send Super Carriers – he would have been expected to deal with whatever the Chinese threw at him. If the Chinese has attacked in force he would have been expected to fight his ship. If they damaged it – he would have been potentially accountable. Even if Roosevelt was damaged through no fault of Croziers – he would have been expected not merely to save the ship but to continue to fight it.
If the Flu was running though his ship – he would still be expected to fight it.
If Ebola was running through his ship – he still would be expected to fight the ship.
Roosevelt is not merely a warship it is one of the most important warships in the US navy.
The chairmen JCS was asked about this, while he defered on questions of details – specifics of personal matters in the navy are not his domain, he observed that based on what he understood the actions of the navy were appropriate. And Keen was correct.
This is NOT a Trump thing. There is no indication that Trump had anything to do with it.
Though he certainly had the absolute right to fire Crozier under the circumstances.
The Roosevelt is not a Cruise Ship. It is not even a navy supply ship – and a navy supply ship captain would have been canned under similar circumstances.
I would further note that if the captain of a super carrier is incredibly popular with his crew – that alone indicates a problem. It is not a captians job to be popular. His primary duty is not to the crew, it is to the country, it is to carry out orders. It is to maintain his ship in the best possible state to carry out any possible orders. It is expected that he will do so – with sick crew. Even if he himself is sick.
The Roosevelt is an $8B weapon. Not a pleasure yatch.
It is my understanding that Trump did not Fire the navy Sec. that Sacked Crozier.
That Navy Sec. Flew to the Roosevelt and made public remarks to the entire crew that were tone deaf (if otherwise accurate). After the media took him to task, he offered his resignation without prompting, and told his staff that he expected it to be accepted – which it was.
Essentially he held himself to the same standards he held Crozier to.
It was Croziers job to maintain the readiness of his ship – Crozier failed.
It was the Navy Sec. responsibility to protect the immage of the navy and the administration.
He failed and fell on his sword – he behaved more honorably than Crozier.
Trump had little or nothing to do with this
OK I was wrong.
“ he offered his resignation without prompting“
Wrong once again…
Numerous former high ranking navy officials began speaking out against his behavior, both his intemperate remarks on the ship, and his abrupt removal of Crozier before UNIFORMED navel officers conducted a review of his actions. AND did Modly even have authority to remove Crozier from command of the ship? Appointed SECNAVs do not have operational command authority over Naval forces.
AND Defense Secretary Mark Esper had chastised Modly, telling him he had to publicly apologize to the sailors for his remarks- seeing the writing on the wall Modly chose to apologize AND resign.
You keep providing unsourced assertions.
You do not seem to grasp that the frequency with which you have been wrong or worse made false accusations in the past means that you are not trusted.
Regardless Modly spoke to this personally.
On the issue you fixate on the most he explicitly stated that he had no communications with the whitehouse at all on the issue.
With respect to the rest of your assertions – they are either false or irrelevant.
Gen Keene JCS supported the decision to remove Crozier.
Further the decision was inevitable and Crozier should have known that and so should you.
It was likely even if the story had NOT gone public. I have stressed over and over that Crozier was the Captain of one of the most important ship in the US navy.
As a consequence of his actions or inactions that ship’s readiness was significantly impaired.
Their is no way that Crozier survives that.
This is the US Navy – no one gives a shit what his excuse is.
You should actually read the Comments Modly made to the crew.
You are correct they were “intemperate” – but they were accurate.
The captain and Crew of the Roosevelt are expected to be able to “fight the ship” even after being hit by a hypersonic cruise missle. The Roosevelt is NOT the borough or sleepy hollow.
It is one of the most critical warships in the US Navy. it is also the cornerstone for a battle group.
Crozier received command of the Roosevelt as the next step before becoming a rear admiral.
Military advancement is incredibly darwinian – you thrive in impossibly difficult circumstances or you are out.
The only think Modley did wrong was make a public spectacle of saying what was true but need not have been publicly stated.
Crozier was fired – the message was delivered.
Did Modly have the authority ?
Are you nuts ?
You are confusing YOUR wishes, and possibly traditions for actual authority.
The President has the authority to dismiss anyone in the military.
Truman dismissed MacAurthur.
The Civilian control of the military is US dogma, it is in the constitution.
You and the military might prefer that the Sec Navy stay out of “operational matters” – though this was NOT as much an operational matter as it was a national security matter.
Do you understand that making public the fact that a Super Carrier is potentially unable to do its job – especially one in the pacific is an invitation for aggression ?
China could have taken this as an opportunity to threaten Tiawan, or make agressive moves in the South China Sea – and even if these did not result in conflict, thwarting them would significantly stress the navy without the full utilization of the Roosevelt.
Had Crozier not emailed half the navy pretty much assuring this would go public,
even if the Roosevelt’s readiness was negatively impacted – China would not know that.
And if you doubt that readiness was impacted, 3000 sailors were removed from Roosevelt and replaced. Do you really think that the Navy has an extra super carrier crew lying arround fiddling their thumbs ?
I have a close friend who was a Navy Chief on the GW. An action like this percolates through the entire navy. Leaves have to be cancled. Families are disrupted. There is a domino effect through the navy.
You really do not seem to understand how big a deal Crozier’s failure was.
You also do not seem to understand that if you are one of 13 captain’s of US Navy Super Carriers, with the expectation of being a rear admiral next, no one is interested in your whining that something is “not my fault”.
Your first duty is to assure the SHIP is operational at all times. Like it or not the crew is secondary. This is what they sign up for when you join the military. Sailors are not their to protect their own safety. They protect that of the entire nation. If you are not up to the fact that assuring the readiness of the warship to do its job is more important than your personal health – do not join the navy.
You’re right, I was wrong, the Secretary of the Navy may—
“assign, detail, and prescribe the duties of members of the Navy and Marine Corps and civilian personnel of the Department of the Navy.”
However, in practice, he doesn’t directly reassign uniformed officers, allowing other uniformed officers in the chain of command to determine the process. 90% of his responsibilities in peacetime are related to obtaining supplies and equipment, the construction maintenance and repair of buildings and structures, and military equipment, and other budget matters. So what decided him to jump so hard on Crozier?
In reflection, it seems to me both Crozier and Modly are decent competent patriotic men who have the nation’s interest at heart. Both apparently were good at their jobs; now both are past tense servants of the nation. This is Trump Miasma at work. Like COVID, TM infects those forced to inhale that malevolent air. Those working in any capacity in his administration need to practice conscientious mental social distancing from him. If Hillary was elected, we wouldn’t have the same level of discord permeating the country. And we certainly won’t have it when Biden is elected…
That’s looking better now, with Bernard dropping out; Real Clear Politics has Biden holding an average 6-point lead over Slow Donnie – when the Bernie backers stop sulking that lead should hit double digits.
Practice and authority are not the same.
It is not normal for the Sec Navy to dismiss a Capitain.
But it is in his power to do so.
This should have been handled by the CNO – but it is pretty clear he was not going to do so.
Modly did not want a repeat of the Navy Seal mess, so he acted.
Modly’s actions were proper up to the point he flew to the Roosevelt and admonished the crew. In doing so he made very nearly the same mistake that Crozier did.
He was right to resign.
This is not because what he said was not correct. What Crozier emailed was also correct.
It is because he should not have said it.
Further it was honestly a mistake on his part to fly out to the Roosevelt period.
Dismissing Crozier because the brass was not acting was necescary.
Personally involving himself further was NOT.
He was not required to allow the brass to clean up the mess, but he should have allowed them to.
You always find a way to blame Trump.
You are correct Crozier and Modly both appear to be decent, honest, ….
But Crozier mad a mistake in a profession where mistakes are not allowed.
You may not like that – but that is the terms and conditions of being a navy captain.
Do we allow the captains of ssbn’s to make a mistake ?
If Clinton was elected the nation would be differently divided, the issues would be different the mistakes would be different.
But we would still be divided.
Further for all your ranting accusations and speculation about Trump – We KNOW about Clinton.
We will remain divided so long as those on either party think that they can use government force to advance an agenda. I have consistently opposed that regardless of who is doing it.
Where are you ?
Listen to Democrats. Absolutely they are happy Bernie is gone.
But they KNOW that Trump has to fork up Covid19 horribly or they are in deep shit.
This is not Republicans saying this. Even Joe Rogan thinks Biden is daft and is toast.
Glenn Greenwald made it clear – it was not Republicans painting Biden as seriously slipping – it was many democrats until he was inevitable and now it is democrats accusing Republicans of pushing something THEY brought up first. Further Greenwald and several other journalists pointed out that Not only is the Joe is not their story coming from Democrats, it is also TRUE.
You say Biden is up by 6 ? Clinton was up by nearly 12.
Right now this election rests entirely on Trump’s handling of Covid19.
If he botchs that – in terms that ordinary people, not those suffering TDS like you see, he is done, Anything else – Landslide Trump.
Bernie dropping out is unlikely to add votes to Biden-Trump matchup polls.
When Trump vs. Biden was polled last week Voters were not given a Bernie choice.
It is more likely that Bernie dropping out will boost Trump a few points.
Because for reasons that I find hard to grasp a significant portion of Bernie voters went top Trump not clinton in 2016 and possibly more will in 2020.
This is from Modly’s “appology”.
“We pick our carrier commanding officers with great care. Captain Crozier is smart and passionate. I believe, precisely because he is not naive and stupid, that he sent his alarming email with the intention of getting it into the public domain in an effort to draw public attention to the situation on his ship.”
Are you really still saying Modly backed down on the need to sack Crozier ?
The captian of any US navy warship deliberately drawing negative public attention to his ship for any reason – including the health of his crew is not acceptable conduct.
I can understand that democratic congressmen do not get that.
Esper was not upset with Modly for canning Crozier – but for pouring gasoline on the fire that Crozier started.
Cozier’s sacking was appropriate and inevitable – and it had to be done quickly.
Modly’s remarks were accurate but need not and should not have been said, and he appropriately resigned for making them.
Modly, made a mistake and corrected it himself.
Crozier should take a lesson from that.
Modly was a 1983 US Naval Academy graduate and a Naval aviator for 7 years.
He was familiar with the navy chain of command.
YOU have noted correctly that military officers are at odds with Trump and the whitehouse – though you have failed to note that Trump has strong support from enlisted men.
That difference should not be surprising.
Modly’s decision was in conflict with the advice of the CNO, who would normally be the person to sack Crozier. In this case Admiral Gilday was wrong.
Modly was concerned about conflict between the Navy brass and the Whitehouse.
But the driving issue here was national security.
Crozier placed a relatively small issue of the health and safety of his crew above national security. That is specifically NOT what a captain must do.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/04/07/why-crozier-was-correct/
There are no new facts in the Brookings story, just spin.
There are two issues regarding Crozier.
The first is was he right regarding Covid19 – we will never know, Brookings says that he was right as evidenced by the Navy decision to remove much of the crew at Gaum.
But was that decision actually a health or readiness decision ? Or was it a political one – and there are numerous political factors beyond left/right. Further once Crozier’s email went public – which as Modly noted Crozier eitehr had to know would happen of he would have to be naive and stupid – and as Modly noted in his “appology” Crozier is neither Naive nor stupid, therefore he sent the email KNOWING it was going to go public.
There are inumerable problems with that. Croziers immediate superior was the Rear Admiral of the battle group Crozier was apart of – an officer whose quarters and offices were on the Roosevelt. Crozier needed no email to consult him. That rear admiral was Croziers chain of command – not the list of people in his Email. Maybe Crozier talked to that Rear Admiral already and was turned down. Maybe he did not talk to him. What DID NOT occur is Capt. Crozier dealt with the issue with his immediate supperior and got his permission.
Aside from breaching chain of command, Crozier also breached national security.
All the public arguments for Crozier fixate on a Fallacy – that his first duty is to the safety of his men. That is FALSE. Warship’s and the military would not exist if that is true.
Brookings notes that most of the crew were removed from Roosevelt – as if that somehow exonerates Crozier – it does not, it damn’s him. It is an indication that the navy not only does not have confidence in Crozier – but it does not have confidence in the crew of the Roosevelt.
This is a big deal. This crew will have this hanging over there heads for the rest of their lives.
But you go ahead and beleive what you want.
Oddly you have gone from TDS to TDS twice removed.
In Jay world Crozier is good because Trump MIGHT have been offended by Crozier’s remarks, or MIGHT have had him sacked – except he did not, or even because Crozier might have been sacked because of your impression of what Modly thought Trump wanted.
This is not even a close call Jay. Crozier is the captain. He would be held responsible if a typhoon caused Roosevelt to be unable to perform its job.
We hold Captain’s of super carriers to unbeleivably high standards.
Crozier fell short of those. That is all it takes.
That’s not “fair” – well the navy is not about fair.
Trump is a dishonest untrustworthy authoritarian asshole who needs to be STOPPED from further Don-fuckery.
“ Former Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis issued a rare public rebuke of President Trump Tuesday over his decision to fire Glenn Fine, the Pentagon inspector general charged with overseeing implementation of the $2 trillion coronavirus stimulus package.
“Mr. Fine is a public servant in the finest tradition of honest, competent governance,” Mattis told Yahoo News in an email. “In my years of extensive engagement with him as our Department of Defense’s acting Inspector General, he proved to be a leader whose personal and managerial integrity were always of the highest order.”
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-declares-war-on-inspectors-general-201355376.html
What has the Pentagon IG got to do with the $2T aid package ?
This whole thing is nonsense.
Absolutely Trump needs to clean house in the IG’s.
But firing an IG does not mean there will be no IG.
Another will be appointed.
Regardless constitutionally actual oversite is a CONGRESSIONAL responsibility.
Trump can not fire congress.
Like lefty’s you seem to have this view that a job is a right.
That if you do that job either by some objectively correct standard that does not exist, or in such a way as to get benefactors such as Mattis to support you that you are entitiled to keep that job forever.
That is bunk.
Trump serves at the pleasure of the electorate. In November you get to remove him if you can.
The remainder of the executive serves at the pleasure of the president.
It is long past Time for Trump to clean house.
I am not sure what the specific “sins” of the DoD IG were. Just as I can make no sense of why the DoD IG would oversee the stimulus.
Atkins clearly needed fired.
But whether Fine was a good public servant or some deep stater subverting Trump is irrelevant. He serves at the pleasure of the president.
I also get very tired of this heaping of praise on people who have show no special reason to deserve it.
“a leader whose personal and managerial integrity were always of the highest order”
These are not things one says of someone who “did their job”.
I would not even say that of Gen Eisenhower – who we know was somewhat short of personal integrity but a manager of the highest regard.
Please tell me who today is a Patton, MacAurthur, Spruance, Nimitz, Halsey ?
Can we save the eulogies for the dead or people who really are exemplary ?
Just doing your job is not justification for crocodile tears and public tearing of sack cloth.
I think that the President has the right to have someone that he trusts to oversee the implementation of a $2T stimulus that he signed.
Many of the inspectors general are part of the resisistance, masquerading as unbiased civil servants. One of the many attempts at a “gotcha” question during this week’s press conferences involved an HHS IG appointed in 1999, who claimed that there was a shortage of test kits….it was untrue, bcause her “study” was completed on March 23, before many of the newer test kits even came out!
Plus, she realeased her report to the press, without ever going through Admiral Giroir and the Task Force. What kind of insubordinate crap is that? It’s resistance crap, that’s what.
I can tell you that I first had symptoms on a Thursday, I called for a test on Friday, got the test on Saturday, and got the results first thing Monday morning. It was quite easy.
There are too many career bureacrats whose main goal is to “get Trump,” and who actively work with the press to do so.
If Trump believes that Glenn Fine could be working against him, he would be a fool to keep him on as a “watchdog.” And if James Mattis likes Fine, that’s all well and good, but James Mattis is pretty much a nonentity in this, now, isn’t he?
And it’s the citizenry’s right to OBJECT when an untrustworthy president takes actions that can’t be trusted.
Trump as you well know is a sneaky lying SOB who will do anything and everything in his presidential POWER to cover up his own malfeasance.
I’m truly glad you’re recovering from your physical bout with COVID, Priscilla; it’s unfortunate your Trump DELUSION Syndrome seems incurable.
Of course, you can object. But objecting doesn’t mean that Trump doesn’t have the right to sack employees of the executive branch who have made it clear that they are not willing to follow the President’s policies…or who have made it clear that they will sabotage those policies, if given the opportunity.
It’s not a matter of Trump or not Trump ~ it’s a matter of how our system works. Queen Nancy does not get to use the stimulus as her personal slush fund for Democratic donors and programs, the way she did during the Obama stimulus (remember the “shovel ready projects” that were not shovel ready?)
While I mostly agree with what you have said.
Anyone who thinks that this Stimulus is going to be on NET beneficial is blind to history.
Anyone who thinks it is not going to be swill for the political classes of both parties is also blind to history.
There is another issue i am trying to get a handle on.
But it appears that Congress as part of the stimulus created an oversite authority made of a committee existing IG’s with Fine selected has the head.
This structure is with near certainty unconstitutional. There is atleast a full century of law regarding this particular area – basically the efforts of congress to create centers of action within the executive that are not really answerable to the president.
Historical examples are the Federal Reserve, the NLRB, the FCC, the FEC. the CPRB
The text of the constitution does not allow these independent executive bodies at all.
But SCOTUS has allowed them, but only if they meet a narrow set of criteria that this Stimulus review board does not meet.
As SCOTUS has determined.
an actually independent body must:
have a board, it can not have a single director,
The board must have members from both parties.
The members must have staggered terms,
They must be appointed to that board by the president and approved by congress.
SCOTUS has allowed the PRESIDENT to circumvent the “confirmation process” by transferring already appointed and confirmed people from one role requiring confirmation to another.
But it has never allowed congress to do the same.
Congress created an oversight board, and then populated it with people who had already been appointed and confirmed.
That is not constitutional – not as the constitution was written, and not even as SCOTUS has interpretted it.
To be constitutional, congress would have had to require Trump to appoint the members, and the Senate to confirm them, and if that was done, Trump could not then fire them.
By not doing this properly, this new board is NOT independent, and Trump can re-arrange its members as he pleases.
And that is what we are seeing.
The Trump administration is not Normal.
Way too many career people, and on occasion even some of his own appointments, are actively working against him.
If I had said that about Obama, you could rightly call me paranoid, but no sane person doubts that with Trump.
Myriads of people in government openly admit that on issue after issue they act to thwart Trump. That would be fine – if they were congressional democrats. But they are not, they are members of the Trump administration.
I am a firm beleiver in checks and balances – but that is not what this is. This is active (and passive) sabatoge by people who swore an other to the constitution and the president.
I do not know that each of the IG’s recently fired was a problem. But given the past 3 years,
I think Trump is proactively firing people in critical positions when he has any doubts.
i have long advocated here that Trump did not fire enough people at the start.
It is CONGRESSes job to interfere with the presidents policies – NOT the rest of the executive.
Voters are entitled to see the policies they voted for implimented. Especifally when those polices REDUCE government.
Trump should be judged by his success or failure as a president – but that requires that half his own administration is not trying to sabotage his own success.
CrossFire Hurricane and the Mueller investigation were a disaster.
To the extent that you MIGHT beleive they were EVER justified, it should be self evident to all but a dolt, that very quickly Mueller and Comey KNEW there was nothing there.
And still for 3+ years they continued on a fishing expedition.
Our constitution establishes in serveral places WE DO NOT TARGET PEOPLE.
The excercise of the investigative power of government is predicated on the existance of a CRIME.
IG’s are a very weird entity within government. Horowitz fairly clearly demonstrates an IG acting within his scope – Horowitz stuck to his lane. His investigation was confined to FBI & DOJ, and it was confined to whether those involved followed the laws, and procedures within their department.
Conversely IG Atkinson. Was far outside his lane. He accepted a complaint that was nothing more than gossip, that involved differences of policy, not violations of law, and that was outside of the domain of the Inteligence community – i.e. outside the scope of anything he was responsible for.
I am repeatedly posting about the various problems with different efforts to “investigate Trump”.
The most fundimental problem is not that investigations are occuring but who is doing them and how.
Comey’s investigation was illegitimate, Mueller’s was illegitimate, Atkinson’s was illegitimate.
But Schiff’s investigations were NOT illegitimate. Congress is free to do politically motivated investigations of the exectutive branch.
I think Schiff’s investigations were done badly, and with zero respect for due process, and that those failings were self evident to all of us, and I expect democrats to get punished in the next election as a consequence, and if they are not, then republicans will do the same to the next democrat elected president.
I also beleive that the House should have taken its subpeona fight to the courts, and that they should have won in MOST instances. Oversite of the executive is THEIR job.
One of the problems with the Comey and Mueller misconduct, is that it was fundimentally political and the consequences should be political – if the house conducts a blatantly political and unfounded investigation they are held in check by VOTERS.
Instead we are badly holding to account those within the FBI for violations of the law or procedure. They tried to use criminal processes for political purposes and are being badly held account criminally.
What SHOULD have occured was an investigation by the actual political body – the house, with political results and political consequences.
I have no problems with the house and the executive slugging it out over policy.
I have major problems with turning the weaponry of the executive branch against itself over policy.
An excellent article on Trade deficits.
NOTE:
A trade deficit MUST have a balancing capital inflow.
That means a trade deficit MUST result in foreign investment.
And the only portion of that foreign investment that a country will EVER have to pay back is interest and principle on government debt.
https://www.cato.org/blog/quick-dirty-lesson-about-trade-deficit
The FDA has grown 79% since 2007 – why is it doing so badly ?
Is it possible that growing a government department actually makes it LESS capable ?
https://www.cato.org/blog/fda-bureaucracy-grows-79-2007
In this instance, the way you demonstrate your importance is to create more red tape and paper work.
Few will ever agree with me, but other than military, govt is the problem, not the solution.
F’up Fauci has made more mistakes only days later to have them proven mistakes, to not be considered an expert, but his lifer title bestows that label upon him regardless of his actual abilities.
The military is not immune to all the problems of government.
It is merely an actual necescity – a legitimate function of government.
The FDA is not merely not within the scope of legitimate government but a real negative impact on overall health.
One of the noteworthy issues regarding the current pandemic is it is clear that free markets are able to respond quickly. There are already 40 vaccines ready to or in testing.
Contra what the government claims there is no requirement for 12-18 months to make them available.
12-18 months is the amount of time it takes to work through the FDA’s standards for safety.
It is glaringly obvious – more so that normal, that getting the high degree of safety the FDA requires will COST LIVES.
It is very rare that people can so clearly see that “playing it safe” is quite often more deadly than taking appropriate risks to provide a solution.
But this is ALWAYS the case. It is just rarely so dramatically visible.
Every single drug or treatment you seek approval for is always a balance between the risk of bringing something to market with less that perfect testing, and the real harms caused by delay.
Vaccines, China, Covid-19.
Since almost every bug seems to start in China, I think Trump needs to work with China, direct the drug companies to produce 1.5 billion doses of a tested vaccine, but one that has not gone through the FDA red tape, send them to China where they can force their citizens to be vaccinated and slow any new fall and winter outbreak.
Never happen!
H1N1 started in either Mexico or more likely the US.
MERS started in Saudi Arabia.
The 1918 Flu started in the US.
It is normal for the seasonal flu to start in China.
Right now Covid19 is in the wild.
i want to be careful because we do not know enough about it.
But in all likelyhood it will periodically return until either it mutates or until we eradicate it globally.
But it is highly likely that each return will be weaker than the last.
There is likely an increasing body of people who are immune and that will make spreading it harder.
Further we do not know why any virus does nto effect 100% of the population – but none do.
The house oversite committee has absolutely zero interest in investigating why the government has failed.
Instead it is going to investigate why the sun rises.
“price gouging” is simply the normal mechanisms of a free market responding to the laws of supply and demand.
When demand significantly exceeds supply – prices rise dramatically – causing production to rapidly spike and prices to drop.
It is not only something you can not stop, it is not something that you want to stop.
Further any means of doing so is “price control” and always and everywhere “price controls” lead to either higher prices or shortages. Does no one remember Nixon’s disasterous odd/even gas rationing ?
https://reason.com/2020/04/06/house-coronavirus-committee-will-investigate-price-gouging-not-governments-failed-pandemic-response/
I wonder how I missed this.
In 2018 Paul Romer won the Nobel Prize for Economics.
I have repeatedly cited Romer’s work here in the past specifically his work demonstrating that if you have a sufficiently complex mathematical model you will always be able to hindcast the past perfectly and STILL forecast any outcome that you wish.
Romer was echoing an important argument made by classical liberal economists,
Economics (and all other social sciences) must START with our understanding of human behavior. You can not work backwards solely from data.
The same is true outside of the social sciences.
One of the huge flaws in CAGW is that the proof that CO2 causes warming and the strength of the warming it causes is NOT measured empiracly, it is determined by modeling.
In real science (or logic) the conclusion derived from your experiment can not be one of the assumptions that you start with.
Drip, drip drip.
The water is increasing another couple degrees all you “crabs” with a smart phone!
You will here, no personal info is being tracked by government. Its all anonymous.. And you can turn off location GPS tracking.
Well if this happens, when will government say they need personal information tracking in the name of safety?
And according to a Princeton University study, not all tracking can be shut off by the user.
https://deepstatejournal.com/2020/03/31/u-s-government-hatching-this-crazy-plan-to-track-social-distancing-in-america/
I think I will just keep one old flip phone when traveling and let the battery go dead at other times.
Do you you subscribe to Prime? If so you can watch this great Indian Bollywood movie (with subtitles) showing what happens when the nation’s cellphones revolt against the people, swarming into multiform destructive creatures. Great special effects, and incidents addressing your privacy concerns – here’s the trailer:
Sorry don’t have Prime. Is that part of Amazon prime or is that in addition to the prime for buying stuff?
Included with the buying Prime membership.
My wife buys a lot of art supplies on Prime- the membership saves way more money than it costs…
I think my wife has it. I just buy stuff and get free shipping with 4-5 day delivery.
I have yet to get into streaming stuff.
You’re missing out on a great free deal, Ron.
You can view Prime on computer, mobile device, or TV if you can connect to programming on it directly or via a device like Roku or Apple TV etc.
Hundreds of movies and tv shows and documentaries new and old. Great old films available, from the 30s 40s and 50s. I’m watching “Impact’ a 1949 Brian Donlevy drama-mystery now.
Here’s a search database link to what’s available,to watch
https://reelgood.com/source/amazon
Interesting. I have HULU with liove TV since we are 35 miles from a transmitter, rolling terrain, trees all around us and in any kind of weather except perfect weathr, the local channels pixelate when on antenna. The antenna is 45-50 ft above ground level, 6 ft above the roof line, amp at the antenna and amp at the splitter inside the house. Without the amps, get nothing.
So HULU has all this old stuff also and I don’t watch much. Mostly sports and a few network shows. I am watching some BBC, Canadian shows.and many of the history network programming. And occasionally a few minutes of a news program.
I can also tap into my sons CBS on demand if I want to watch the new Star Trek show.
Anyway thanks for the info. Might check it out using my wifes account.
Pigs are flying. We agree.
Prime is not only a great deal, but if one person has it, everyone in the family does too
Don’t tell Donnie it’s a good deal. He’ll have a shit-fit.
If your wife has prime – you have prime, you can link family member accounts to the main account.
My fundimental problem with government access to tracking information is that even thought I would allow it for some things – what is clear from the xfh mess is that whatever the rules are government will not abide by them.
Otherwise I would have no problem with letting CDC get a warrant for to track the past 14 days of someone infected by Covid19 AND give them identifying information on anyone who they came in proximity.
But the warrant is limited to public health – no matter what else they may think they have discovered, nothing gets shared outside of health officials and the use is limited to health.
But what are the odds of government conforming to those restrictions ?
Odds with a Trump-like administration in power: next to zilch.
We’re tracked daily now. Drive anywhere with you cell phone on, your movements are recorded or posterity.
Future citizens of the technocrat will have the privacy of fish in a glass tank.
You might be tracked, but its not government. No different than wire tap warrant. You are sledding on thin ice when government can get that info. And while you do that, why not require phone companies to record all conversations and give that monthly to the government.
But what do I know. I’m just one of those nutty libertarians seeing boogy men behind every door and window.
I do not care if my cell phone company tracks me.
They do not have the ability to throw me in jail
The NSA domestic spying program is pretty serious and an invasion of our privacy – but it is not actually as bad as you claim. Nor do they retain all of this data for “posterity”. With few exceptions it is not kept over 18months, and in most cases not more than 90 days.
Further while the NSA captures the data – though not the dynamic tracking you are claiming. The data of US persons can not be search in an identifying fashion without a warrant.
That is the law. Of course as we know from Horowitz – they lie to get warrants, and from Adm Rogers, we know they search all too often without the required warrants.
Dave, “But what are the odds of government conforming to those restrictions ?”
About as good as the government following the FISA rules. And remember, 43 asked for that temporarily for 5 years. Now going on 19 1/2 years.
Trump continues to be an asshole.
Not surprising- he is what he is..
More surprising is how many idiots continue to support him.
Addendum: even the Wall Street Journal is telling him to shut the trump up at his daily self serving corona newscasts
Jay, you are unbelievable. First you bitch about all the money Trump has, how he is running his businesses behind the scenes, how he should have to sell off all his properties and get out of management (WHICH HE HAS)…and now…
you bitch because you think he should be running the businesses and he open up the properties to first responders and healthcare workers.
What the F do you want? (Other than his apparent defeat come this November). Do you want him running them and opening them up or not running them and letting someone else make decisions.
He is not running his businesses. His kids are.
Get a life and start making some sense with your constant TDS. Your rants are beginning to sound like Biden ramblings.
Second Try.Word Press again!
Jay, you are unbelievable. First you bitch about all the money Trump has, how he is running his businesses behind the scenes, how he should have to sell off all his properties and get out of management (WHICH HE HAS)…and now…
you bitch because you think he should be running the businesses and he open up the properties to first responders and healthcare workers.
What the F do you want? (Other than his apparent defeat come this November). Do you want him running them and opening them up or not running them and letting someone else make decisions.
He is not running his businesses. His kids are.
Get a life and start making some sense with your constant TDS. Your rants are beginning to sound like Biden ramblings.
In this case he does not even own the hotel.
it is actually a Hilton.
BTW Trump owns only a few of the Trump branded Hotels in the world.
So whenever you see any of this kind of nonsense you should immediately check if it is actually owned by the Trump’s
Beyond that I strongly suspect the claim in the King tweet is even more incorrect than that.
Las Vegas has approx 1500 cases as of Today. Las Vegas has 914 Accute Care beds.
That is 1 for every 2 Covid19 cases and less than 10% of Covid19 cases require hispitalization.
There are 2299 Primary care doctors who LIVE in Las Vegas – that is 2 for every ICU bed and 20 for every hospitalized Covid19 patient.
So why would we presume that Las Vegas has 100,000+ doctors visiting from other locations in need of a hotel room to stay in ?
There are 200+ hotels in Las Vegas,
Las Vegas has 27 hotels with over 2000 rooms. There are only 55 hotels with over 2000 rooms in the world.
That is 27 hotels that could provide an individual room for an individual doctor for each Covid19 patient in Las Vegas.
That is also 27 hotels that could provide a room for every doctor in Las Vegas.
The largest “The Venetian” has more than 7000 rooms – it could provide individual rooms for a team of 4 for every single Covid19 patient in Nevada, and a team of 5 for each patient in Las Vegas, and a team of 50 for each patient in the hospital.
And just to be clear ALL of these hotels are CLOSED right now.
Further ALL of these Hotels would be the WRONG choice.
No one Sane wants to keep a large hotel and its substantial staff open to provide services for a handful of doctors and nurses from out of town – if ANY.
Close the hotel, send the staff home.
Put any out of town help you have in a motel – where they do not have to interact with lots of staff. Where they can drive in, park walk directly to their room, and go in without getting within 2M of another person.
But logic and sanity have no place in Jay world.
He is going to drag in the hotel staff from 200+ hotels so that each hotel can handle one or two doctors or nurses. Having hundreds of staff fawning over people who are spending their entire day surrounded by people sick with Covid19.
BTW I highly doubt that Trump international Las Vegas is the only hotel not providing services to visiting doctors.
Because there is no sane reason that almost any hotels in las vegas should remain open.
But rational thought is nto permitted in those suffering from TDS.
Biden is more rational.
To answer Stephen Kings question.
I do not know, but it is much easier to find out who owns the Trump international Las Vegas.
From Wikipedia
“In September 2012, the Trump Organization announced that it sold roughly 300 condominium units in Trump International Hotel Las Vegas to Hilton Worldwide’s timeshare division, Hilton Grand Vacations.”
Or you could got to Forbes where they list individually each property that Trump owns.
The Trump International Las Vegas is not on the list.
So once again you – and apparently Stephen King are spreading “fake news”.
My guess is that if you had actually bothered to check Kings twitter feed,
Someone has corrected him.
But I doubt you actually care.
I doubt you give a fork about being accurate.
I doubt you care if false information influences others to form false oppinions.
If you can inspire another person to hatred – I doubt you care if you did so truthfully.
But you can prove I am wrong. I would be very happy to see you prove I am wrong.
It is easy – CHECK the crap you post before posting it.
From what I know, the Trump property has two towers, one with 12+ rooms that are basically condos and the other that is basically hotel rooms.
1200+ rppms not 12.
Roby heard something about Vermont. Is it true you can go into Walmart or other stores and buy certain items, but while you are in there buying groceries or at a drug store getting meds, you can not buy vegetable seeds for a garden?
Everyone, I have no idea what Word Press is doing from my computers. Desk top, tablets, etc. I write, I post, it hangs up with the home screen, I search for my comment, nothing there. I go back, change the wording slightly, post, its posts correctly and also posts the original comment. So when you see duplicate, that is why.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGv8gEvJ-T8&list=TLPQMTAwNDIwMjB1sZuV6rprwg&index=2
No video
More nonsense from Youtube.
This was a PragerU video.
They interviewed people in new york city asking them to choose between Trump getting re-elected and Corona getting worse.
Almost all prefered that Trump not be re-elected even if it meant more people died from Covid19.
I am getting fed up with this youtube censorhip.
Taking something down because the truth is unpleasant is really vile.
Actually immoral.
So there has to be millions like you and I that believe there should be an open forum for things like that.
I dont understand why some billionaires like Koch Brothers or someone with a more moderate Libertarian leaning like Mark Cuban does not start an internet social site where anything posted stays. And have fact checkers who dont take things down, except for terrorist identified posts promoting violence, but flagging them with labels and linking truth linked sites so other can see why they post is fake.
Why is all social media controlled by liberals blocking conservative items.
“I dont understand why some billionaires like Koch Brothers or someone with a more moderate Libertarian leaning like Mark Cuban does not start an internet social site where anything posted stays.”
David Koch is dead, Charles is 84. Mark Cuban is only libertarianish.
There are only a few people in the world willing to stand up for the right of a nazi, a homophobe to speak revolting garbage.
And the bright line for free speach is at the far extreme.
Once you ban Der Sturmer, it is only a question of time before you ban PragerU or Laura Loomer.
You are prepared to take down the posts of terrorists – I am not.
Not even those promoting violence.
Let people speak, then judge them and their ideas based on that speech and their actions.
Absolutely fringe groups will ALWAYS manage to appeal to small numbers of the broken and vulnerable. But supressing them does not make them less appealing.
The overwhelming majority of us are able to judge a group correctly by their OWN speech.
We are not quite there yet – though this election may prove the tipping point. But I think a backlash is coming.
There is this great rant about the polarization of the country right now.
This is part of what is polarizing the country.
Censorship – even censorship by private parties such as Youtube does, ultimately undermines the trust in those who do the censoring. Especially as the basis for the censorship is not absolutely clear and broadly supported.
I posted a link to a Covid19 article published on Medium. Within hours of publishing that link the article was taken down. The article was very long. But it posted not only everything we knew or thought we knew about Covid19, but the studdies supporting that informant AND the studies contradicting it, both the malthusian positions and the claims that much was over-reaction.
Maybe we are being fooled at the moment and Covid19 is about to jump to another level.
But if it does not, the less panicked assessments in that article are mostly going to have proven True.
So how is it that you think many people are going to respond as they learn that various media sources they trusted made a concerted effort to block all but the worst case scenarios ?
If things actually went completely to hell – anyone saying “don’t panic” would be justifiably excoriated for eons. And that remains possible. But increasingly it is likely this is going to be a fizzle. That the worst part of Covid19 will be what we did to ourselves. Not what it did to us.
In that instance it is those who censored the less panicked and now self-evidently correct positions whose credibility is under question.
I have been pushing the fact that there is a difference between saying you are wrong about an issue, and saying you are lying.
Being wrong undermines your credibilty. Being wrong about someone else’s purported error also undermines your credibility. But none of us are right always or wrong always.
We win some, we lose some. We should be measured by the frequency with which we prove right especially about controversial issues and especially when we are standing alone.
Or more simply our credibility is not EQUAL – once again we are not equal.
Equality is a trojan horse.
But credibility is not integrity.
There is a difference between being wrong and lying.
There is a difference between an error of fact and a moral error.
Misstating a fact is an error of fact. It undermines credibility.
Lying, or calling someone a liar are moral acts. Being wrong undermines integrity as well as credibility.
Censorship is a moral act. And like all moral acts – you had better be right.
I am less concerned about Youtube and social media censorship than you are.
We KNOW it is going on. We also KNOW it is tilted. We are more cognizant than ever that one viewpoint is actively supressing the expression of others – and in many forums successfully.
The left beleives that silencing dissent somehow positively changes the world.
It does not. Bad ideas remain bad even when critique is forbidded.
And people are not so stupid as we attribute to them.
It is possible, even probable that censored viewpoints will move elsewhere. The market correcting the problem in one way.
It is also possible that we fill in the void on our own. We know that what is provided is tilted.
We adjust accordingly.
Regardless I am angered by this censorship.
I am not worried by it.
It is self defeating.
OK Stpped reading at your response about Koch / Cuban. Way to long.
So I will rephase.
I dont understand why someone who is a rich conservative/ Libertarian who is concerned about our country creating a social media website for those that would support a site that did not censure any political post regardless of position.
Not comment required. It will do no good to change my thoughts on that thinking unless it comes from someone rich enough to do that and promote it and they say why it would not work.
So you beleive you are personally powerless and that unless some rich (and dead) guy comes to your aide you are doomed.
Sounds like the plot to Batman.
Short enough ?
Well powerless due to lack of funds and expertise to create and open, balanced and fair social media site that would provide all aspects of an issue.
Not powerless since I dont believe one iota of information presented anywhere, especially the cable news or print media without verification, unlike 90% of America that drinks the kool-aide widespread for dimwits to buy without thinking for themselves.
“Not powerless since I dont believe one iota of information presented anywhere, especially the cable news or print media without verification,”
Good for you.
” unlike 90% of America that drinks the kool-aide widespread for dimwits to buy without thinking for themselves.”
Current evidence suggests that the portion of people who “drink the kool aide” is quite small.
Our regard for media is at an all time low.
Our disbeleif of media does not unfortunately overcome our own personal confirmation biases.
The skills needed to create and innovate and take big risks are not attributes of conservative personalities. They are found most commonly in progressives and to a lessor extent libertarians.
Conversely the skills needed to sustain most anything over the long run are fundimentally conservative.
I know of extremely few enormously successful startups created by conservatives.
There are some libertarians – a disproportionate number in comparison to the population. But most innovators are progressive, or atleast liberal. Conservative risk takers are extremely rare. that is BTW one of the very odd aspects of Trump. That is also a part of why I note that his tactics are inherently those of the left. Trump is NOT by personality conservative. He is by personality on the left. Frankly he is not by ideology conservative. His ideology is inherently populist. He has enough conservative and libertarian views to succeed, and enough populist ones to win elections.
Somewhat on point.
The left has been aggressively moving to defund anything that offends them.
It appears they have been successful – but not in the way they had imagined. Advertisers are now providing blacklists along with their add campaigns. these are topical keywords that they do not want their advertisements running concurrently with.
Rather than these blacklists specifically targeting conservative content, they are targeting ALL controversial content. The keyword blacklists include not just conservative issues, but progressive issues.
The net effect is that they are defunding the news.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/10/when_media_advertising_boycotts_backfire_142918.html
Evidence is increasing that the Steele Dossier was a deliberate Russian Disinformation campaign. Further that the FBI in particular and the Intelligence Community more generally were aware of that evidence and that possibility at the time.
This not merely seriously undermines CrossFire Hurricane
It also undermines the Intelligence community assessment that those on the left constantly fixate on.
That assessment claims the Russians interfered in the Election to help Trump.
Yet that is completely inconsistent with the fact that the false information in the Steele Dossier came from Russian government sources.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/russia-case-footnotes-be-declassified-exposing-fbi
“ Evidence is increasing that the Steele Dossier was a deliberate Russian Disinformation campaign”
Naivety or knuckleheadness?
You suggesting the Russians wanted Hillary elected?
Really? They provided Steele with negative tales about Trump to elect her?
(Laughing into my Costco Kirkland Canadian Whisky $18 a bottle delivered)
Trump loves Putin, and Putin love Trump.
They’re fond of fondling each other’s balls…
https://foreignpolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/gettyimages-1000226238.jpg?resize=1920,1280&quality=90
“You suggesting the Russians wanted Hillary elected?”
I am not suggesting anything specific beyond that anyone who claims to know what Putin or Russia want is lying to themselves.
MIGHT Russia want Hillary over Trump ?
I can think of myriads of reasons that could be the case.
Clinton is far more maleable. For every claimed tied between Trump and Russia you can find there are 10 involving Hillary, There were actual news articles in 2016 suggesting that Hillary was deliberately attacking Trump regarding Russia, because HER links to russia were possibly the weakest part of her candacy.
Russia did not give $140M to the Trump foundation.
They did not give $500K to Melania.
They did not borker a deal with the Trump administration for control of 20% of US uranium – which Hillary was part of.
Obama was elected in the midst of a war between Russia and Georgia where the US supported Georgia. Yet CLINTON negotiated the “Russian Reset” to end the hostility between the US and Russia.
Then Clinton fomented a coup in the Ukraine that replace corrupt pro Russian paws with corrupt anti russia pawns and had to impliment “Russia Reset II”
The Obama adminstration was practically sleeping with Russia – and Clinton orchestrated that.
On policy issue after policy issue the US under Obama was friendly to Russia – with Clinton up to here ears in it. Clinton expected top be hit hard by candidate Rubio or Candidate Cruz on her ties to Russia. She got fortunate that Trump was not a cold warrior overtly hostile to Russia.
Obama/Clinton and the whole democratic party is anti-fracking, that is quite litterally billions of dollars in russian pockets and out of those of americans.
The Obama/Clinton mideast policy was overtly pro russia. Shifting to Iran was pro-russia, staying in conflict anywhere in the mideast was pro russia.
Russia is the worlds third largest produce of oil today – behind #2 Saudi Arabian and ….. #1 the US. anything that weakens SA strengthens Russia.
So yes there are far more reasons to beleive that Putin might prefer Clinton to Trump.
And there still are.
It is highly likely Putin prefers Biden or any generic democrat to Trump.
“Really? They provided Steele with negative tales about Trump to elect her?
(Laughing into my Costco Kirkland Canadian Whisky $18 a bottle delivered)”
Laugh all you want that is more plausible than Putin actually wanted Trump.
“Trump loves Putin, and Putin love Trump.
They’re fond of fondling each other’s balls…”
Why ? Because you say so ?
How exactly is it that Putin benefits from Trump as president ?
Is it because Trump is forcing Nato to start to defend itself ?
Is it because Trump guaranteed Europes energy supplies when Putin tried to blackmail Europe ?
Is it because Trump has not dropped or relaxed sanctions against Russia, While Obama imposed sanctions and dropped them repeatedly ?
Is it because Trump is friendly to Saudi Arabia while Russia is a major competitor ?
Is it because Trump loves Fracking ?
How about some actual meaningful way in which Trump has not made life more difficult for Russia than Obama did or Clinton would ?
Absolutely Trump says nice things about Putin sometimes.
And Xi, and Kim Un and ……
Do you think Trump is Fondling Xi’s balls ?
Grow up Jay.
Putin is the leader of Russia. His goal is amplifying Russian Power.
He does not give a shit about the nice things Trump might say about him.
Just as Trump does not give a shit about the nice things Putin might say about him.
They are BOTH looking after the interests of their country.
SOMETIMES US and Russian interests align.
Sometimes they do not.
Trump changed the rules of engagement for US forces in Syria to – if Russian forces get in your way – shoot them. Really friendly.
The Russian’s sent a state of the art (for Russia) Frigate to challenge Two US destroyers that were used to attack Syria. Trump order the US Destroyers to turn the Russians away – even if that meant conflict. There is footage on Youtube of the confrontation. And for those who are clueless it also demonstrates the difference between a navy with a 250 year tradition – and a maritime tradition almost twice that long. And a country who has never managed a competent surface navy. The US commander was far more skilled than the Russian and forced The russian into a position he had to yeild or fight, and where he was going to be the perceived aggressor in a fight that he was certain to lose.
Trump has used the US Navy aggressively – both against Russia and against China.
Part of the context of the Crozier mess that you are oblivious to is that The Roosevelt was part of an agressive naval stance towards China that started the moment Trump took office – that was a REVERSAL of Obama.
I keep telling you that Croziers actions had a negative US national security impact.
Roosevelt played a significant role in that aggressive posture towards China.
Yet I am sure you can find plenty of clips of Trump saying nice things about Xi.
In fact I can find a few recently where he talks about the fact that he really did not want to close travel to China at a time when the US had just completed a major Trade deal, and even now attacking China comes at risk to the trade deal and other American interests.
But still Trump is willing to confront Xi.
Just as he does Putin all the time, except that you do not see it.
So please tell me WHY it is that you think Putin wanted or wants Trump ?
What US policies under Trump are in russia’s interests ?
The single most damaging US policy with respect to Russia is unrestricted US fracking.
That alone alters the balance of power throughout the world in favor of the US and to the harm of both Russia and to a lessor extent China.
The next most damaging policy is guarenteeing European energy – which could not be done without Fracking.
And the next is pushing Nato to build up its own defenses.
Today the Russian army is a paper tiger. But for their nukes they are not a serious threat.
It is within the power of the EU to contain Russia with very little US help.
It is within the power of the EU to prevent Russia from threatening its neghbors.
It is NOT within the power of the US to do so. We do not have an actual dog in those conflicts. And we have no land border with Russia. All US european bases rest on the political whim of the nations they reside in. It is actually critical to peace and security in the world to assure that Nato is able to defend itself with minimal help from the US and more importantly BELEIVES it can. Otherwise we have Hitler and the 30’s all over again.
Hitler could easily have been stopped had the europeans stood up to Germany any time before Poland. Even at that late date, had the french come out from behind the magninot Line and driven their forces toward Berlin Hitler would have been defeated.
Hitler correctly beleived the Eurpoeans would not be willing to stand up for themselves until it was too late.
If you want to contain Russia the Europeans must not repeat that mistake.
Trump is the first US president since WWII that has expected the Europeans to address their own weakness BEFORE Putin tries to exploit it.
And you think Putin likes Trump ?
And here you have another problem. We now have the transcript of Papadoulis’s conversation with a “Confidential Human Source”.
Note, Papasoulis beleives he is communicating with a friend not being interviewed by a hostile FBI agent.
Papadoulis explicity denies that the he or the Trump campaign were involved with Russian in any way. That he or anyone else he knows was involved in the DNC hacking, or even that it is known that Russia was responsible for the leak saying that China, Anonymous, or even a bernie supporter could have been responsible.
This is exculpatory, and it was required that the FBI disclose this to the FISA court.
The FBI did not beleive Papadoulis’s denials which turns out to be poor judgement on their part. But that is not the critical point.
A warrant application is in legal terms “ex parte” that means there is no one representing the target. There is no opposing party. Ex parte procedings are highly discouraged, but sometimes as in warrant applications necescary. Because of that the law, the rules and ethics require the moving party to present all evidence that might be exculpatory.
The requirement to provide that evidence is NOT condictioned on there personal assessment of its importance or credibility. i.e. it is irrelevant whether the FBI “beleived” Papadoulis, if his remarks were exculpatory – which clearly they were, it was required that the FBI include them, which they did not.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-papadopoulos-former-trump-campaign-adviser-denied-campaign-was-involved-in-dnc-hack-in-recorded-call/
Priscilla- this is a comprehensive article about what to expect to see from the covid virus going forward.
This observation should interest you:
“ Second: duration of immunity. When people are infected by the milder human coronaviruses that cause cold-like symptoms, they remain immune for less than a year. By contrast, the few who were infected by the original SARS virus, which was far more severe, stayed immune for much longer. Assuming that SARS-CoV-2 lies somewhere in the middle, people who recover from their encounters might be protected for a couple of years. ”
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/how-will-coronavirus-end/608719/
Jay,
It is possible the assertions in this article may be true.
But the FACTS are WE DO NOT KNOW.
There are lots and lots of “factlets” bits of information – that is either absolutely true or true with a reasonable degree of certainty, that we have available to us, in addition we have LOTS of information with far less degree of certainty. And among all of that we have LOTS of conflicts and contradictions.
Several sources are claiming that Covid19 is not likely to be Seasonal – i.e. the Summer may not bring us respite.
There is some evidence that is correct. But there is also lots of evidence it is incorrect.
At this moment anyone saying one way or the other is making an educated guess.
I am not especially interested in debating each individual point – atleast not as more than an effort to better understand Covid19.
I am certainly not interested in trying to make political Hay of Covid19.
It is a virus – it does not have a political agenda.
My fundimetal position regarding Covid19 is based on a single very important generalization.
“Systems that are so fragile they easily self destruct, do not exist for long.”
Global highly fatal pandemics are extremely rare. If they were not life could not and would not exist.
That single bit of information means that Given a list of 20 points of contention regarding any global threat – including Covid19, The results are NOT going to distribute on a bell curve.
They are going to weigh HEAVILY towards the least devastating consequence.
That does not mean pandemics killing millions are not possible. Just that they are incredibly rare.
That means that of every 10 “facts” that are uncertain regarding Covid19 the ODDS are that atleast 7 will be on the benign rather than malignant side. Further that will ALWAYS be true of every bit of uncertain information we might have.
As we are able to be more and more certain about Some “factlets”, no matter how begnign or malignant each may turn out to be, the odds are still that the remaining unknows distribute more heavily to begnign that malignant.
But not – I am still talking about probability, Not certainty.
Covid19 could defy the odds. Global murderous pandemics do occur, but they are very very very rare.
Sometimes viral immunity is short – sometimes it is incredibly long. In very rare instances immunity is even passed on genetically.
Small Pox hit the Faroe Islands about a century ago. 65 years later it hit again. Not a single person over 65 got it. Even people who did not catch small pox 65 years before did not get it. people who did not “catch” small pox had still been sufficiently exposed and developed sufficient immunity that 65 years later they did not catch it.
H1N1 immunity seems to last about 35 years. we have had Spikes of H1N1 about 35 years apart since the 1918 flu. Further the immunity seems to be somewhat generic – if you get one H1N1 flu you are highly unlikely to get others.
The most promising work on Covid19 seems to be based on ongoing work with SARS and MERS which are closely related.
A biolab that was developing antibodies to fight SARS has found that every antibody they have developed to fight SARS is effective against Covid19 in vitro.
We do not really KNOW what is limiting the current Covid19 spread.
It could be the shutdown, it could be social distancing.
It also could be that many of us have had corona virus colds in the past – 40% of all colds are caused by corona viruses and there may be an unknown sized pre-existing pool of immune or partially immune people.
Further Immunity is not binary. Prior infections might protect heathy people but prove insufficient to protect those whose immune systems are weaker. Or prior immunity may not be absolute – it may protect you from casual exposure that would effect others, but not spending 6 hours with someone shedding the virus.
But all the above – and most everything in your article is SPECULATION.
Some of it will prove to be true, alot of it will not.
Your article claims that the US failed regarding Covid19.
What is the basis for that ? What are the criteria ?
At this time the US has among the lowest # of deaths per million of population.
That number will almost certainly be revised even lower as the US is counting every death of someone infected with Covid19 as a Covid19 death and that is not standard, or standard throughout the world – Some other nations will similarly revise deaths downward.
But many nations with lower rates will be revising them upward.
Increasingly the projected US deaths are going to be about the same as the upper end of a normal flu outbreak.
There are specific areas in which the US has failed:
Like almost every single other country on the planet we failed to stop this from getting into the general population. That is a real failure, and it needs to be addressed in the future.
The US failed DESPITE taking more agressive measures than any other developed country.
It is increasingly evident that we failed – because despite acting earlier than anywhere else it was already here – particularly on the west coast were it appears to have arrived in early january – long before it was expected.
Interestingly the east coast cases appear to have primarily come from Europe – not China.
So again we failed to restrict travel from europe soon enough.
CDC failed with regard to developing an effective test. Despite having tests already developed by the Chinese, South Koreans and WHO, the CDC insisted on developing its own test – it failed twice, and ultimately fobbed off testing to …. The private sector.
It is absolutely true that if this had been an order of magnitude worse our health care system would have been strained beyond capacity – but it was not.
And the “it could have been worse” – is ALWAYS true. The spanish flu could have been worse. Regardless are you looking to produce and stockpile enough ventalators and respirators, and … for 100% of the population for 6 months ? Ultimately you MUST scale preparedness against the probability, and that means that once a century or so you will be “unprepared”.
The same is true of shortages out side the healthcare system. There is nothing that americans have been short of to crisis levels throughout this. Whatever it is that we want – has aside from brief shortages ultimately been made available to us.
The only shortage that the free markets can not address is the government imposed shortage of freedom.
The other clear failure is with our regulatory system. It has been self evident from the start that big and little Pharma has been able to deliver whatever we needed. What they can not do is make the regulatory process they do not control move faster.
It is self evident that our regulatory system has ZERO ability to “triage” – to do actual cost benefit analysis – not regarding drugs, or vaccines, or the economy.
That the CDC, NIH and FDA in the US will strive for perfect safety no matter how long that takes and how many people have to die before we can meet their requirements.
Regardless, what constitutes failure ? What constittues success ?
Thus far there appears to be small differences between SARS and SARS-Cov-2.
SARS appears to have a higher fatality rate, but a lower spread rate.
But the antibodies for SARS appear to work against SARS-Cov-2, and the drugs that we were working on to fight SARS probably work against SARS-Cov-2.
Increasingly nearly all “experts” are predicting that we are at or near the peak.
If US Covid19 deaths tripple before the end of this – they will still be below a bad flu season.
Further we have not yet accurately assessed deaths. 2/3 of all Covid19 deaths are of people who likely would have died in the next 6 months.
We do not attribute deaths involving the flu or pneumonia to those diseases where there are underlying conditions that would ultimately prove fatal.
Current Covid19 deaths are less than equivalent of 2 days of US deaths from all other causes.
The information the “experts” have provided us with – the projections, the models, their best guesses have all been extremely important. It is their job to ADVISE us. But no amount of expertise can create certainty from uncertainty. There has been almost no “fact” regarding Covid19 that we will actually know for certain until long after this is over.
We still do not reliably know the number of people infected, which means we do not know the actual R0 or degree of infectuousness or the actual mortality rate. It is absolutely certain that the adjustments we make as we learn more will substantially reduce Covid19’s mortality rate.
It is possible though unlikely that it will be less than that of the Flu.
We are currently crediting lockdowns and social distancing for gaining control of this. But models predict those measures prevent overwhelming the healthcare system. They do not reduces cases, and probably do not reduce deaths.
Further countries that did NOT shutdown their economies do not appear to be doing worse than the US.
We will eventually know what worked – if anything and what did not. but we did not at the time we made decisions, and we do not now.
https://www.kuow.org/stories/washington-state-to-return-centurylink-field-hospital-to-feds
I hope the more optimistic projections prove correct.
However, so far previous early optimistic projections have not materialized (please, no cherry picked exceptions).
Whose opinions are you going to trust as more reliable going forward – experienced experts like the guy who wrote the Atlantic article, or opinions emanating from Trump’s gut and Hannity’s asshole?
“However, so far previous early optimistic projections have not materialized (please, no cherry picked exceptions).”
There is infinite room between “the end of the world” and “this is nothing”
This has not turned out to be nothing.
Right now it is on track to being about the same as the flu.
There will be alot of post mortem fighting over whether it is the same as the flu BECAUSE of all the actions we took, or whether that is what it would have been anyway.
“Whose opinions are you going to trust as more reliable going forward – experienced experts”
The BEST information so far has come from people who work with economic models – investors. Who have the best understanding of statistics.
These are the people who have told us from the very begining that this was being radically overhyped and that based on the actual data the probabilty of the end of the world predictions coming true were highly unlikely.
These were NOT the medical experts. They were also not right wing talking heads.
They were just people who understood probability and statistics – because that was what they work with all the time. People who make LOTS of money being right about probability and statistics.
While there expertise was important. It was not the determining factor. The key factor – something you completely miss all the time, the factor that is huge in why government – including government experts screw up all the time.
Is the people who were RIGHT are the people who have “skin in the game” – who had something to lose if they were wrong.
I like Faucci and Brix – but honestly – THEY have been wrong – More than Trump, More than even Hannity. They do not have “skin in the game”
People in government do not lose when they are wrong.
Almost everyone in the VA today was there before they Forked up.
And they are still forked up under Trump.
Trump BTW faces serious consequences if he is wrong – he faces an election soon.
Faucci and Brix are career public servants. Even if they lose their current positions, they are not “gone”. It is unlikely they can be fired.
I like Faucci and Brix, and I would agree they are the “experts” – but they have actually been wrong pretty much by the numbers from day one.
And I am using Faucci and Brix as standins for pretty much every expert you might wish to cite – IHME, Imperial College, Los Almos, …. Even your Atlantic writer.
The guy who wrote the article for Medium – the one that was cancelled because he is not a biologist, was very close to entirely right.
Trump has been right more than Faucci or Brix or any of your “experts”.
I strongly suspect that nothing that the government – state or federal has done beyond advise people on measures to reduce the spread of viruses has had any consequential effect.
We will not know that for a while, and if as I suspect that is true you are only barely going to here that leak out. Because the “experts” have a vested interest in hiding the fact they were wrong.
Despite the fact that their predictions were several orders of magnitude off. they are going to declare victory and tell us all that but for taking the measures they recomended BY FORCE, and killing the economy it would have been much worse.
But my guess is that a really good cost benefit analysis would find that with less consequential economic disruption, even if that resulted in 4 Times the Covid19 deaths that the net deaths would be LESS. Covid19 is not the only way people die.
Drugs, suicide, crime, all impact mortality.
You have told me that I am an idiot because I claim that preventive medicine is relatively ineffective in increasing life expectancy (more accurately health insurance, some forms of prevention are effective).
Yet we have shut down all but absolutely critical medical care.
People are unable to go to the dentist unless there is an emergency – yet Dentistry might be the single largest area of medical care that has increased life expectance.
How many people are going to die because routine dental care was delayed ?
There are dozens and dozens of ways a shutdown economy substantially negatively impacts us – including health and life expectance.
It is unlikely I am going to be able to prove my claims to your satisfaction – because shortly the same experts who screwed up are going to tbe doing the post mortem – with the objective of proving that things would have been worse without them.
Even Trump, Pelosi, Schumer McConnel.. all have a vested interest in a post mortem that plays up how important what they did was, and how worse it would have been but for them.
My hope for the post mortem is SMALL truths, not big one.
Understanding that the CDC/FDA can not move fast enough and that if we want beneficial drugs and vaccines if something like this happens again we must reduce the power of government.
That we could have had testing available to anyone who wanted it in the US by mid january – but for CDC.
That we could have antibody treatments today or maybe in a few weeks but for the FDA.
That we could have experimental vaccines in a month or two, But for FDA and reasonably safe ones available for most everyone by the end of Summer – but for the FDA.
I would further note that the “experts” are going to analysze this to find not only were they instrumental, but if we give them more power they will be able to prevent this in the future.
But that is factually 180 off. the “experts” were SLOW to react. Trump was fast, just not fast enough.
Further what I see is evidence that we are VERY NEAR being able to END airborne virus’s.
I see Covid19 as the last gasp.
Maybe it is NOT possible today to develop a safe vaccine in 2 months.
But what i have seen demonstrates to me that there is no reason that must be impossible.
that we have or are very close to the technology to do so.
Biohackers can develop low risk vaccines in 4-6 weeks for about $50K.
Would that have worked against Covid19 ? Maybe, maybe not.
But give them sufficient freedom from FDA and in a few years that is CERTAINTY.
The same is true of antibodies.
We will find out soon enough if Hydroxychloroquine actually has consequential antiviral properties. Maybe it does, maybe it does not.
But I saw enough to know that the biotech industry is at worst a few years from developing a safe antiviral to fight ANY virus in a few months – given the FDA stays out of their way.
What i saw tells me that in the future STARTING NOW, we need to treat the “experts” as the impediment. Not our saviors.
We have or soon will have the capability of wiping out diseases like Covid19 QUICKLY.
If we can get the experts out of the way of preventing that.
I think that is pretty clear.
But I doubt you saw that.
What have I gotten from this ?
Experts – especially those who do not have “skin in the game” are ridiculously bad at forecasting anything. Do I trust Trump more than those experts ? I do not know. I have no good reason to Trust Trump – he is not an expert. But though he was periodically wrong, he was right more than “the experts”. I can not speak to Hannity, I do not pay attention to him.
Free markets work. I have all the toilet paper, hand sanitizer, antiseptic wipes, Zinc Lozenges, soap, gloves, and N95 masks I need. No more nor less. Nothing was permanently in short supply. I could get anything I wanted at reasonable prices in a few days from Amazon. And I even got alot of things – including masks FROM CHINA in the middle of this. Slow, but still before I needed them.
Hundreds of companies were ready to construct the magic bullet to kill this. It is near certain that one of these will work. It is also near certain that but for the FDA we would have dozens to try RIGHT NOW.
Dozens of companies were ready with vaccines within a little more than a month. Many of those will fail. But the time to market for the atleast one that is certain to succeed is solely determined by the FDA which is completely unable to grasp the concept of SAFE ENOUGH in a crisis.
It is increasingly appearing that Ventalators for Covid19 are actually a mistake and may make the disease worse. But that is NOT true of all possible future diseases.
Regardless, if Ventalators were the answer – free markets can deliver them rapidly.
While people were ranting that all our medical supplies were being made in China and we were all going to die. US Manufacurers produced MILLIONS of medical supplies. So much that we switched to fighting because US made masks and ventalators were being shipped to Canada and Germany.
Anyone who missed the fact that US producers can ramp up FAST is blind.
Not instantly, but incredibly fast.
3M was there for us, Ford, GM even My Pillow. As well as myriads of other businesses of all scales.
After our government repeatedly botched developing a reliable test – private tests were available – and would have been available faster and more plentifully but for Government.
What I saw was that everything I have been saying about free markets and regulation for years is completely true.
What I saw was those evil businesses that are going to poison you to make a buck, were giving it everything they had to save your life – and often for free or very low cost.
And they did so despite government trying to kill us all.
Jackass Say says: “ This has not turned out to be nothing.
Right now it is on track to being about the same as the flu.”
Tell that to the New Yorkers dying in record numbers
Understanding the news – a objectivish approach.
remdesivir
(Bloomberg): “ Gilead Sciences Inc.’s experimental drug for patients with severe Covid-19 infections showed promise in an early analysis, raising tentative hope that the first treatment for the novel virus may be on the horizon.
The report published in the New England Journal of Medicine tracked 53 people in the U.S., Europe and Canada who needed respiratory support, with about half receiving mechanical ventilation and four on a heart-lung by-pass machine. Eight additional patients were left out of the analysis: one due to a dosing error and seven because no information was available on how they fared.
All received remdesivir for up to 10 days on a compassionate use basis, a program that allows people to use unapproved medicines when no other treatment options are available. Over 18 days, 68% of the patients improved, with 17 of the 30 patients on mechanical ventilation being able to get off the breathing device. Almost half of the patients studied were ultimately discharged, while 13% died. Mortality was highest among those who were on a ventilator, with 18% of them dying.”
The data I am seeing is that 2/3 of patients who end up on ventalators die.
If that is the case, remdesivir looks excellent.
Regardless, there are many things we have available to try. There are drugs that worked on other coronaviruses, there are drugs that showed promise with aids.
There is one biotech firm that is trying pretty much every drug in the FDA’s list of something like 200,000 approved medications – anything that appears to work from that list can be tried by doctors on humans without prior FDA approvals.
I beleive Remdesivir is not yet approved for anything. that is why it can only be used “compassionate use” – i.e. for a critically ill patient.
I and not in detail familiar with the published results but there are large scale uses of hydroxychloroquine now, and these look promising. The prior french study was scaled up to 1000 severely ill patients and had a 97% success rate.
New York is using it both propholactically for first responders and as treatment with rumours of good results.
i would note that these and many other efforts are essentially going arround the FDA.
Because the FDA can not move fast enough.
At this time there are more than 100 potential medications that have shown promise.
But only those that have been previously approved for SOME use can be dispensed by doctors without FDA approval.
Everything else that is promising must get past FDA, that means it must atleast get FDA compassionate use approval – which until now has been hard to get.
Does it really matter? Who the hell wants to live like this for the next 18-24 months before a vaccine is approved.
And with a 30%+ unemployment rate, the economy is screwed for years. Every day that goes by now just makes that worse. This is going to make the 30’s look like boom times compared to what we have coming. And nothing government has done or will can stop the depression train because the whole world is in the crapper.
With governors closing stores to vegetable seeds and plants, people out of a job cant even plant a garden to help feed themselves. That only puts more pressure on food banks like in Texas that had over 3000 lined up the first week and over 10,000 lined up in a parking lot this week.
I am too old to live 20% or more of my expected life span left hold up in something close to home imprisonment while our government argues over what the hell doctors can use to treat this disease.
And at some point, I would expect many more to begin thinking like me, especially those older that want to have some relationship with grand kids.
And that doesnt even touch the problems like depression, because once that begins to set in your whole outlook on life, your attitude toward others and your desire to look to the future is severely impacted.
Ron,
i do not like alot of what has been done – by Trump, by democrats, by republicans.
There will be some negative consequences of this that are permanent or near permanent.
But the world is not coming to an end. Most of the economy is likely to recover very quickly – once let off the leash. But a few areas – movies, sports, theater, resturaunts will take a long time to recover – and some will fail.
There will of course be winners. Amazon – hugely. Biotech, GM, Ford, Mypillow, 3M.
As politely as I can I might suggest that you have a small dose of that depression you noted.
For all my rants here. I am an optomist.
Alot of bad things have happened, but we will get past it.
We will move on.
We will thrive.
Unfortunately I doubt this will change many of the things that need changed significantly – but I suspect there will be some small changes.
I suspect the FDA might be reigned in a little bit.
New California antibody study could point to possible herd immunity to COVID-19:
https://www.ksbw.com/article/new-study-investigates-californias-possible-herd-immunity-to-covid-19/32073873
Wow, Jay, a link to an article citing VDH in a favorable light ?
You do know that VDH is a pro-trump conservative ?
I’ve followed Victor for years- back before his brain started to scramble.
But that doesn’t mean everything he says now shouldn’t be considered as possibly relevant.
There is no one you should assume is always right
No one you should assume is always wrong.
VDH is too much of a neocon for me.
He is a good historian and nearly always worth reading.
I would prefer what he wrote directly rather that some reporters construal of it.
But there is a growing body of evidence this arrived in the US sometime between late Nov. and early January.
While late Nov. seems to me to be a big reach.
I was flying home from Asia with my family in late Dec. many on the plane with me were from China.
Its also going to be of interest when Stanford University finishes it study of California and the number of cases that might have been active well before this hit the country.
Hopefully along with this, a recent leak of intelligent information indicating China recognized this in october will be investigated and reported. Supposedly China began hoarding PPE as well as not wanting to jeopardize the trade negotiations at that time leading them to hide for months what was happening.
But with an election coming up, I have no faith in our system or media to take the time to really figure out what happened so it might not happen again.
Election …Aug-Nov
GOP congress scrambles to pass last ditch Trump agenda…..Dec.
Transition Govt info coverage….Dec-Jan
Inauguration—Jan
Democrat first 120 day legislative agenda…late Jan-Mid May
And that assumes no recurrences of current govt lockdowns.
Will all the media give various stories the attention they deserve as they become public ?
No.
But the stories will become public and many people will learn about them.
Like we have said many times, you have much more faith in the voters than I do. Once the stories become known, no one will be interested in them because we moved on. Once they are know there will be a huge brouhaha going on win Washington with the GOP senators blocking a new healthcare initiative by the democrats and Shumer threatening a full blown nuclear option in the senate to pass legislation with a one vote margin.
“you have much more faith in the voters than I do.”
To some extent, because there is no other choice.
Who are you going to substitute ? If you do not trust people to govern themselves, who shall do it ?
There are plenty on the left and right who would happily direct everything.
I prefer to see the people govern themselves – constrained by a constitution that limits the power of government. But even that constraint is ultimately the choice of the people.
Well Dave, when a law is written and states someone will have to pay a fine or fee, that law goes to SCOTUS, and to make the law legal, the Chief Justice states that the word “fine” or “fee” is really a tax gives me cause to question the future based on a constitution where made up facts create law.
No amount of wordsmithing on the part of the courts can alter the fact that limited government not merely works best, but that as government scales larger it increasingly works worse, ultimately to the point of failure.
Neither the people, the voters, the politiicans, the courts can change what is essentially a law of nature. Life is way too complicated to manage top down.
I can not see the future, I can only guess – but you sure are a pessimist.
But I would ask you consider something else.
Government does not scale well – anywhere ever.
There are innumerable reasons that socialism fails.
But ONE of those is that it requires extremely broad and deep government.
And that has not worked anywhere, ever, in any form.
The core problem is one of nature, managing complexity is incredibly difficult, and life gets ever more complex as our standard of living improves.
The bigger government gets the more it fails.
You are pessimistic enough that you see the consequences of future government failures.
But you do not seem to grasp that we learn from failure.
In innumerable ways Trump is the consequence of Obama’s failures.
I would greatly prefer we could find the answers without having to learn through failure.
But whether is it Sanders or Robby, or Clinton or Obama, Top down does not scale very far.
That can not be changed by magic.
Nothing there that I see.
Sorry wrong link
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-consent-governed-authoritarian-overreach-unnecessary/
https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/what-michigans-new-coronavirus-stay-home-executive-order-means
I can understand some of the orders, but when they get to the point that people are in a store, walk past an item and can not put it in their cart, “common sense” (which you do not believe in, I know) is totally missing. When you can not go to a golf course, one person per cart and play golf which is something that few can hit a ball close to their playing partner, commons sense is missing. Here in our state, hiking trails have been closed. Why? Tennis courts have been closed. Why? Moms, dads, kids living in the same house can’t play tennis? Stupidity.
But dang, we can still go to the liquor store and buy booze, We can go to the local Jiffy mart and buy Lotto tickets. Tjose are essential to state tax revenues.We can go to Walmart and buy beer, wine, candy, chips, those are essential. But buying vegetable seeds to feed your family when your out of a job, no way Jose’. Not essential.
If you think that “common sense” is the basis for your personal decisions – that is fine with me. i do not care if you consult ouija boards to make your own decisions.
But government is FORCE. When you use FORCE, you MUST justify the use of force.
Force must be justified EXPLICITLY – saying “its common sense” is NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
I can not kill you claiming that its “common sense” that you were going to kill me.
I must justify that use of force explicitly – with clear specific facts – you had a gun, you pointed it at me, you were in my house, you used the threat of force to make demands …..
“Common sense” has no place in government or law. If you can not explain clearly precisely why the use of force is justified without hiding behind vague generalizations like common sense. You may not use force.
But you are free to rely on “common sense” regarding cooking your food, painting your house or myriads of activities you engage in all the time that do not involve the use of force against others, nor result in harm to others.
You keep telling me that the media will not report stories that do not fit their narrative – and yet here you are repeating stories of government tyranny.
Yes, some stories get disporortionately more coverage than others, and way to much of what is reported is opinion rather than facts. But these stories still get out.
They BEG to get out, and the media can not help themselves, somebody with a national voice will report most anything.
If parks maintance somewhere in the US takes down a basketball net that a lone teen was playing basketball with – we will all read about it.
It may not get the same amplification as Trump’s latest tweet. But it will get our eyeballs.
40 years ago that would not be the case.
Well I cant fond the original comment, so don’t know where it came from. I doubt it was any media that has many readers, but I could be worng.
I would also note that thought there are a few winners, the common thread of most of the Covid19 public health and government stories is one of failure.
And not for the most part failure by Trump.
Failure by many governors and mayors. But public health officials, by an assortment of people in government behaving like petty tyrants and behaving badly.
It is also a pretty clear story that these people can not figure out what is important and what is not. That government does no better (much worse) at deciding what each of us should be free to do and what we should not, what should be for sale and what should not, what businesses are essential and which are not.
The fact is everything is essential.
While there are some partisan aspects to this – republican governors have in general been less likely to over react and push draconian measures. At the same time this is not mostly partisan. It is mostly just a tale of govenrment failure.
At this moment we appear slightly past the peak.
That appears to be true for much of the world, for much of the US, and for nearly all states.
We are warned that relaxing the rules will cause things to spike, yet even sweden which did NOTHING officially, except ask its citizens to take care appears to have peaked.
No nation or area that has peaked and relaxed as had a relapse yet.
Our leaders are celebrating claiming THEIR actions saved lives.
But it is increasingly likely that nothing they have done mattered at all.
This goes right to the heart of Rick’s “tribalism”. When medical decisions using drugs for life and death are based on your politics, can tribalism be much more.impactful?
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/coronavirus/americans_play_politics_with_their_lives_even_when_it_comes_to_covid_19?fbclid=IwAR10MyJjeyWNlVqt4dQPr5tGK1hYlWlS–Af_N7eLGSQq-BOZuyL76hUmjM
Each of us are free to take whatever we want, if you do not wish to take this drug or that – then don’t.
I would likely take Hydroxychlorquine right now as a prophylactic if I could actually get it.
But if you would not, that should be your free choice.
Blacks are highly inclined to distrust government and to distrust medicine – that is a result of centuries of government and medicine being weaponized against blacks. Presumably you have read of the Tuskegee experiments ?
Dave, I am free to do whatever I want short of harming others.
GOP conservatives more likely to take this drug.
Anti-Trump democrats most likely not to because Trump supports it.
Tribalism? Thats my take. They would choose death if it meant not taking something Trump supports.
If some people do not wish to take a drug that might help them because of politics – that is their choice.
But they act immorally if they prevent my taking that drug.
I do not care much about what I deem the bad judgements of others so long as they do not infringe on my liberty.
Why can’t you get your doctor to write a prescription?
Hydroxychloroquine is available as the brand-name drug Plaquenil. And also available in a generic version.
But if you took it as a preventative, you’d be taking it from fall thru winter- maybe year round as the covid infection time frame hasn’t been established.
Here’s Plaquenil’s recommended dosage for Malaria Prophylaxis:
Adults: 400 mg (310 mg base) once weekly on the same day of each week starting 2 weeks prior to exposure, and continued for 4 weeks after leaving the endemic area.
Why should I need to have a persciption ?
Even if you presume – falsely that a doctor must be involved – why must the state be involved ?
It should be readily apparent by now that the government is completely clueless.
Whether it is those who want to shut everything down for years, or those who want ot spend all the money on earth, or ….
It should be obvious even to you that no one in government is capable of making a rational risk/benefit decision. That is avoiding such nuances as that the risks and benefits are not the same for each of us.
Things like there is no sane reason to take the basketball goal from a girl in Denver playing alone in an obscure park. But it is probably unwise for crowds of unrelated people to play in harlem.
In the end people have to make these choices for themselves.
You whigged out over the couple that took fish tank cleaner. Yet it turns out they were both virulent anti-trump democrats.
Regardless, if you give people freedom – some of them will make mistakes, and some of them will pay the consequences.
If you take it away you can be sure government will make a mistake and all of us will pay the consequences.
Yeah let’s get the government out of medicine and doctoring…
https://youtu.be/wfvFtZAguo8
Chloraquine is atleast 200 years old as a drug.
Hyrdroxycholoquine might be more like 70.
While it has risks they are little different from aspirin.
In much of the world it is OTC and handed out like candy.
“But if you took it as a preventative, you’d be taking it from fall thru winter- maybe year round as the covid infection time frame hasn’t been established.”
So what ? Why don’t I get to choose ? The stuff is $0.04/dose. It is not like it is expensive.
It is so old it is not patented 5 times over – NO ONE owns it.
Part of why so little research has been done with it.
How long ? Who knows ?
Why do you assume it will be long ?
Todate no country has seen a resurgence, I know that is early, and China of course can not be trusted. but still even Xi could not be hiding 1,000,000 new cases and 30,000 new deaths.
Sweden did nothing – and just like the countries that shutdown their economy they appear past the peak.
Why does the flu stop ? Why do colds stop ?
Why doesn’t every human get every communicable disease ?
Small pox and measles are 10* more contagious than this, and they NEVER infected everyone, or even most people.
I am guessing we are at the peak and in a couple of months we will not see this again.
Could I be wrong ? Sure. But i am no more likely to be wrong than the “experts”.
I am not beating them up – I respect them more than you. But I do not deify them.
I expect them to give us their best advice. i also expect them to be wrong most of the time – as they have been.
But you seem STILL to be certain that we will hit the worst case.
I offered to leave this blog forever if there were 7M deaths in the US.
There are probably not going to be 7M confirmed cases in the world – though my guess is that there are somewhere between a factor of 2 and 10 cases that never went diagnosed.
I expect that in the end when they adjust for the number of cases that we really have, and correct deaths from died WITH covid19 to died FROM covid19 that the CFR will be less than the flu.
That’s just my guess. but that is the way things appear to be headed.
Give or take a week outside of asia most of the world has peaked at nearly the same time.
Despite different nations using different approaches.
It is unlikely that is an accident. That also means it is unlikely to have anything to do with anything we have done.
This appears to be going away. It is not likely it is doing so because we beat it.
It is either doing so because it has spread as far as it reasonably can. That either by prior genetic resistance, or because it does not like the changing weather that this is dying NATURALLY.
If the later – it will probably be back in the fall. That gives us several months to learn to kill it.
But i am betting on natural immunity. It already appears that SARS and MERS antibodies work against Covid19. I am guessing that immunity to OTHER corona viruses convey’s immunity to Covid19 – just like getting CowPox protects you from smallpox.
20-40% of all colds are corona viruses. My guess is that people who have had a corona virus cold in the past several years are immune.
But that is just a guess. What is not a guess is this is fizzling now. What is also not likely is that it is fizzling because of something we have done.
To those in the health comunity who want to terrify us by suggesting this will happen again.
Absolutely. But as dismissive as I am about our responsibility in defeating this. We have learned alot. There is no obstacle to the rapid development of anti-virals and vaccines EXCEPT our governments. It is also probably wise to do health checks of people entering the country. At the very least take peoples temperatures and ask them to voluntarily quarantine if they are elevated. Further take down their information – so that if there is some pandemic a few weeks later we can go back and trace every sick person that entered in the past month, and isolate them and their contacts.
Voluntary social distancing – we will all probably practice some more of that in the future, and old folks homes will be more careful about letting people with symptoms visit.
But the odds of manditory measures again are slim. That has gone badly. clearly government is clueless. And the left wing media has been very helpful in pointing all this out. They can not help themselves but point out all the cases of police and others in authority behaving badly or stupidly or both.
We have learned – our government does not know what it is doing – not Faucci, not Brix, not the WHO, not IHME not the imperial college, not Trump.
Not because they are bad people – but because much of the time we just do not have enough facts. And because there is little penalty in government for overreacting, but lots for underreacting..
You do understand you are talking about a drug that costs $0.04/dose and is easily made ?
The PragerU video that got censored by YouTube interviewed people in NYC asking them if they would be willing to see Covid19 get worse if that would mean Trump would lose the election.
It essentially presented them with a choice – they could have a world without Trump – but more people would have to die, or they could have fewer deaths but be stuck with Trump in 2020.
They were also asked if they were democrat or republican.
There are very few republicans in NYC. The choice was trivial for them. get rid of Covid19 whatever the political effects.
There were a small number of democrats interviewed who responded the same as the republicans.
Near universally the democrats from NYC picked things getting worse if that would get rid of Trump,. atleast one person was very clear that millions of deaths and the destruction fo the economy for decades was acceptable to her, if it meant Trump was gone.
Its avaible on their website 5 minute videos.
Dave, so here is some more Chinese crap people put their lives at stake thinking they were protected. So tell me again when someone working in healthcare contracts this virus and passes it on before they become symptomatic, others get sick and die ( like so many in nursing homes), what recourse does the death family have against the Chinese co?
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-masks/china-imposes-more-checks-on-mask-exports-to-ensure-quality-control-idUKKCN21S141
Clearly we read the opposite from the same article.
The article plainly has the chinese government cracking down – something you claim to support and I do not and you use that as a basis to presume not merely shoddy products by justification for govenrment restraints.
What I see is:
Chinese producers being slowed down at a time we need their products most, by government.
Which would you prefer – 100M masks a week with 10% of them only 50% effective ?
Or 25M masks a week that are 100% effective ?
We have people on YouTube telling you have to make masks from baby diapers – how effective do you think these are ? We have the Surgeon general now saying that even a bandana offers some protection.
I would rather much more masks – quality be damned, than fewer perfect masks.
But guess what – in an actual free market you get your way AND I get mine.
Your article notes that some masks failed testing.
So do not buy masks from those sources that do not meet your quality control standards.
And others will buy those same masks knowing they are less effective at a discount.
BTW there is no difference between the US and China in this regard.
3M and others have massively scaled up US PPE production.
That can not be done quickly without some sacrifice of quality.
It is near certain that the failure rate of US masks is much higher than it was before Covid19.
If i were responsible for 3M production and I was being told I had a choice between making substantially more with a higher rate of quality control failures or less masks and fewer failures. Right now I would pick more failures.
The masks are only 61% effective on there own. Having far more that are only 50% effective is better than having fewer or none.
For me this is a simple math problem. More masks of lower quality will be more effective at thwarting this disease than fewer better masks.
But if you feel different – pay a premium for a known perfect mask and accept that there will be fewer because of your choice.
Why are they cracking down? BECAUSE THEY WERE PRODUCING CRAP AND GOT CAUGHT!
“Why are they cracking down? BECAUSE THEY WERE PRODUCING CRAP AND GOT CAUGHT!”
So ? If you do not want a chinese N95 mask do not buy one.
Personally given a choice, I would rather see more masks produced even if they are less effective, that fewer that are perfect.
But you are free to ask for whatever you want.
“ diapers – how effective do you think these are ? We have the Surgeon general now saying that even a bandana offers some protection.”
Diapers and home made masks are effective in preventing those of unknowingly affected from spreading the disease. Standards for those masks to be effective much lower than masks needed in confined medical areas.
“Diapers and home made masks are effective in preventing those of unknowingly affected from spreading the disease. Standards for those masks to be effective much lower than masks needed in confined medical areas.”
If you are working in a hospital exposed to lots of critically ill covi19 patients. Even a 90% effective outfit – excellent mask, gloves, goggles, is not going to prevent you from getting Covid19 if you are not immune and you work with it long enough.
It is simple math. 90% prevention times enough exposure is 100% certainty of catching it.
The only difference between a bandana and full out PPE is how long it will take before you are infected.
Conversely for ordinary people whose exposure is infrequent a 40% reduction will reduce this to an R0 sufficiently low it will die on its own.
Once a disease has truly gotten past the borders, widespread use of even weak measure is far more important than medical personel having access to strong measures.
It is just math.
Regardless, one of the things about an actual free market is you can have the degree of protection you are willing to pay for. And the cost difference between the worst and best is relatively small.
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
Prez Bozo at Work!
With expert advice like this what could go wrong?
And Jay, dont forget what the democrats were focused on 100% during this time period, taking energies needed elsewhere. If you were president, your expert told you there was nothing to worry about and you were being impeached, where would you focus?
I think mine would be trusting F’up Fauci and concentrating on the fake new s impeachment.
Really Ron, you’re becoming more Trump zombified day by day.
Fauci said in January there was no serious danger from covid to Americans, prefacing it first that it had to be taken seriously. Did you hear that part?
And he was telling that to Trump then: take it seriously; advice Trump IGNORED. By February Fauci was warning preventative steps needed to be taken. Trump didn’t heed those warnings. He was instead on his usual masterbatory Twitter rants against the press (Fox was still his pal), dragging his lard ass to reacting to a hoard of advice he was getting from numerous sources of the dangers ahead.
In early March Fauci’ s was alerting the public in no uncertain terms:
“The government’s top infectious disease expert on Sunday said that the coronavirus outbreak is getting worse and warned elderly and sick people to avoid traveling or circulating in crowds .”
At the same time Dumbbell Donnie was announcing on Fox there were only “a handful of cases, but that would soon be down to zero.”
Did that not penetrate your Trump-zombified-to-facts trance?
So when Trump restricted travel – first from China, and later from Europe – over the objections of pretty much all democrats and every healthcare expert in the world he was “unserious” about covid19 ?
Jay, this argument does not fly. Absolutely positively EVERYONE failed to grasp the problem with Covid19 early on. Trump, Faucci, the Media, Democrats, ….
Trump was one of the first world leaders to ACT.
If you want to claim he should have acted sooner – arguably true.
But he was already acting BEFORE and AGAINST the “experts”.
This argument is not going to fly.
From the begining through to today the data we have on Covid19 is poor (as is true of most public health data) and still debateable.
Can you assert that the number of cases in the US (or anywhere) is accurate ? +-10% ?
+-100% ? +- 1000% ?
I can’t. About the only “fact” regarding Covid19 that is not still subject to enormous variability is the number of dead – and even that is likely to be adjusted downward by 2/3 when we shift from measuring died WITH Covid19 to died FROM Covid19 as we do with all other infectuous diseases.
So Trump was wrong in early march.
EVERYONE was wrong.
Who is more wrong those claiming there will be 4M dead in the US in early march, or those claiming there will only be a few ?
Just today the head of the Israeli task force on Covid19 said he expect the epidemic in Israel to end in the next two weeks.
Because the epidemic has lasted 6-8 weeks in every single country in the world it has hit, regardless of the measures they have taken. The life cycle of the epidemic in each country appears to be much the same NO MATTER WHAT.
So atleast this Israeli expert is saying there really was nothing that anyone ever could have done.
Does it matter whether Trump or anyone else was right or wrong, if that mistake had no impact ?
The US has had lower deaths per million in population than most of Europe.
With france, belgium, the UK having 3-5 times the death rate of the US.
And then there is Spain and Italy
You can not easily claim Trump screwed up without admitting that EVERYONE screwed up.
“So when Trump restricted travel – first from China, and later from Europe – over the objections of pretty much all democrats and every healthcare expert in the world he was “unserious” about covid19 ?”
I dare you to show proof that any Democrat of importance at the time – including any of those campaigning during the primaries – objected to Trump’s China ban to prevent the virus from entering the US.
Trump’s initial China restrictions were to prod China to respond to his tariff negotiation,and because right wing Republican conspiracy theorists like nationalistic radio hosts Mike Cernivich and Michael Savage were agitating for it. Trump ADMITTED he didn’t think it was a serious threat at the time. And he surely didn’t follow through on the Chinese no-fly ban: I can’t believe you’re addle-brained enough NOT to understand that.
“ 430,000 People Have Traveled From China to U.S. Since Coronavirus Surfaced
There were 1,300 direct flights to 17 cities before President Trump’s travel restrictions. Since then, nearly 40,000 Americans and other authorized travelers have made the trip, some this past week and many with spotty screening.”
That was April 4th NYT. As usual, Donnie’s all hat no cattle.
So will Pelosi’s excoriation of the travel ban on 1/31/2020 in a statment posted on the official web page of the speaker of the house do ?
https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/13120-2
You do realize that immediate after Trump’s travel restrictions were inposed the house judiciary commited voted in favor of the “No BAN Act” to reverse the ban ?
And that there are tweets from Sen. Warren opposing the travel restrictions ?
Even Daily KOS reported favorably on that.
“Trump’s initial China restrictions were to prod China to respond to his tariff negotiation,and because right wing Republican conspiracy theorists like nationalistic radio hosts Mike Cernivich and Michael Savage were agitating for it. Trump ADMITTED he didn’t think it was a serious threat at the time. And he surely didn’t follow through on the Chinese no-fly ban: I can’t believe you’re addle-brained enough NOT to understand that.”
So once again we are supposed to take you word for assertions that have no support, mind reading and claims that Cernocich and Savage are Trump whisperers.
This would be the Micheal Savage that was brutally beaten along with his dog by leftists in San Francisco ?
Regardless, Covid19 would not have been a serious threat to the US had the travel restriction for both China and the world gone in place sooner.
The easiest place to stop these things is at the borders.
Can you read ? The article may have been April 4th but the text explicitly states the travel listed was BEFORE the restrictions.
Further the travel order was not a litteral ban. It was restrictions and scrutiny.
And it would have worked had it been broader and imposed sooner – apparently much sooner.
On Dec 23. 2019 I and my family were on a plane from Haneda international airport to Milwaukee. Probably one quarter of the passengers were from connecting flights originating in China. As more information is coming out, it is now likely that atleast one person on that plane probably had Covid19.
We measure the effectiveness of various actions by actual outcome. Not by words.
You are constantly fixated on Trump’s words.
Worse still you try to micro-parse them, as if you will somehow create a crime against humanity by careful editing.
Acts are far more important than words.
But even the significance of actions is constrained by results.
Standing in front of a Tsunami yelling stop, is brave, but inconsequential.
Telling everyone there is no Tsunami is stupid, but inconsequential as the Tsunami is going to obliterate everything regardless.
Looks good to me.
People who might actually get things going.
So: how do libertarians feel about Trump colluding with other world oil producers to lower the supplies of oil pumped to raise the cost to consumers?
I support it 100% because it is a national security issue. Put us in the position we were in during the 70’s when we were dependant on ME oil, add in the pandemic and most of our PPE and meds coming from China and tell me how secure this country would be. We have to be energy independent and we cant be if the world manipulates the cost of oil to bankrupt shale oil producers that need about $40.00 a barrel. But no one with TDS will understand national security issues if the decision was Trump originated.
So Biden coming, shale oil will be driven out of business, so dont have stroke because the saudis will finally be able to get back to $100 oil.
But it is not a national security issue.
The US produces more fossil fuels than we consume.
Dave, do some research. Learn about oil production cost in America. Learn about orofit and loss. Then tell us with documented information if we can continue producing at the self sustaining levels at the current price for oil.
“Dave, do some research. Learn about oil production cost in America. Learn about orofit and loss. Then tell us with documented information if we can continue producing at the self sustaining levels at the current price for oil.”
I actually have – though none of that matters.
When the Saudi’s tried the Oil war a couple of years ago, SA’s cost from the ground as $6/BBL. Add to that transportation by tanker.
The Saudi’s estimated US frackers would go bankrupt at $80/BBL.
Most Frackers were still in business at $19/BBL (not all).
When prices rose again – those that had stopped – mostly came back.
Further the “war” drove frackers to learn how to produce ever cheaper.
The actual costs at any given time do not matter.
What matters is what when push comes to shove costs can be driven down to.
We do not know that until it happens.
Further last time this happened frackers were at a disadvantage.
Refineries were all at the gulf coast – where the super tankers docked. The US was transporting oil by rail from the Dakota’s to the Gulf to get it refined.
This is why the fight over the pipelines. Transport of oil by rail is more expensive than by super tanker to a port. But nothing is as cheap as a pipeline (nor as environmentally safe).
Further there are refineries going up near where the oil is coming out of the ground.
So if US frackers were able to hold out a could of years ago to $19/BBL.
I would expect they can do better now.
And you seem to think that a price war does not harm SA or Russia.
Russia’s transport problems make those of frackers look small. Further they are just not a s good as US oilmen.
And the entire mideast is a uninteresting backwater, but for oil. And cheap oil means no one gives a shit about the mideast.
I would suggest contemplating something else.
The free market has worked. It has turned oild shortage into oil surplus and the price war Trump interfered in was just the natural process of prices adjusting in a free market.
They have tried to bankrupt the shale oil producers before. They failed, or more accurately most of those who shut down when priced dropped re-opened when they rose again.
This is one of the disproven thesis of anti-trust law.
Predatory pricing does not work.
Even if you lower prices to drive out competitors, you must keep them low or the competitors come rushing back.
If Russia and SA wish to drive the price down so much that Shale Oil producers can not compete – I am OK with that. The moment prices rise they will come back.
In the meantime we get lower prices.
“So: how do libertarians feel about Trump colluding with other world oil producers to lower the supplies of oil pumped to raise the cost to consumers?”
Like much of what Trump does regarding Trade I am opposed.
Trump should have stayed out of it. The markets work these things out on their own.
But as damage goes – again like most of Trump’s trade screw ups, this is still small potatoes.
How ‘bout that; agreement; another in a long list of Trump screw-ups; those small potatoes in a massive stew of screw-ups
Jay,
You do not seem to be listening to anyone else.
You keep trying to divide the world binary into Trumpanzee’s and those who hate Trump.
Everyone here find’s fault with Trump. Which should not be surprising. What are the odds that one person would agree completely with any other person on everything ?
The weight each of us gives to what each or us sees as the failings of the current president – whether that is Trump or Obama or Bush or …. is an individual choice.
One of the many reasons Trump was elected in 2016 was that he was the lessor evil.
Many Trump voters were unhappy about that choice at the time.
Honestly, Trump has been a much better president than I expected.
He has made lots of mistakes – every president does.
Further there are things he does that work politically that are inferior choices economically or practically.
But for the most part the bad choices he makes are not nearly so bad as his immediate predecessors, and the good choices he makes more frequent and more significant than his predecessors.
I disagree vigorously with pretty much all his trade policies.
But he has carefully avoided engaging in protectionism in a way that would do significant harm to the economy. And frankly he is not a protectionist. He is a type of free trader, he uses protectionism to leverage freer trade deals.
I still think that is a mistake. but it works for him politically and the economic damage is small and he appears to be very careful about that.
We can go through a long list of Trump’s flaws, but most of them are similar to his trade flaws. The damage is small and in most instances it is less that whatever the policies of his predecessors were.
We see it differently; no additional word spillage will change that.
He’s a divisive undignified buffoon.
The damage he’s already done to the soul/character of this nation far surpasses any of his minor accomplishments.
Character is destiny: though neither of us will be around to see it, history will mark him with contemptuous scorn.
“He’s a divisive undignified buffoon.”
We were divided long before Trump. We have been becoming more divided for a long time.
But the greatest shift occured while Obama was president.
Further the Pew data shows the most fundimental change was the hollowing out of the center left. Republicans/Conservatives shifted slightly to the right during Obama’s tenure, but the center left was pretty much destroyed. This is pretty much self evident by our political debates. At the start of the Obama administration those calling democrats and Obama socialist were excoriated – that was like calling them Nazi’s, it was untrue and unfair. But over the course of the Obama administration those on the left slowly embraced the notion and label of socialism.
All this occurred long before Trump was involved.
Obama divided the country more than any other president. Trump inherited that division he did not create it. Do you think that Hillary would have united the country ? Biden ? Sanders ?
The country will not be reunited until a majority of democrats shift back towards the center.
That is not happening so long as a substantial portion of democrats have no problems calling almost half the country hateful, hating haters.
Again Trump has nothing to do with that.
This country as a whole is NOT going to embrace socialism.
The Obama experiments – such as PPACA have actually quelled the taste of myriads of americans for big experiments with government. It will be a long time before you can get broad popular support for such experiements – when you are even halfway honest with people regarding the cost.
PPACA has been a failure. Not because it destroyed the economy, but because very very few people can claim to have benefited, very few know someone who has benefitted,
But we have all seen the cost – both inside of government and out.
Again none of this has anything to do with Trump.
“The damage he’s already done to the soul/character of this nation”
The character of the nation is its people. Those destroying that character are those who are calling almost half the country hateful hating haters.
Again that greatly predates Trump.
“far surpasses any of his minor accomplishments.”
What had Obama accomplished ?
He certainly did not unite the country.
“Character is destiny: though neither of us will be around to see it, history will mark him with contemptuous scorn.”
I have no idea what History will say. The New York Times 1619 project is now telling me that the entire history of the US is about slavery and racial hatred and oppression.
That the US should be remembered with Scorn in comparison to other countries – like China or Cambodia, or the USSR.
Do I trust historians like that to write honestly about Trump ?
Do I even care ?
This bug is something from a sci-fi movie.
https://www.wlns.com/news/health/coronavirus/navy-removes-126-from-hospital-ship-after-virus-infects-7/
How does it get on a ship almost three weeks after sailors isolated and none their patients were infected.
Our local news covered a story, young lady, afraid of illness, not leaving home for over 3 weeks, no contact with anyone, groceries delivered, left on porch, packages left on porch, all brought into home with gloves, containers cleaned, hands washed. She just came down with covid-19, positive test.
How does someone get sick, never talking with anyone, separate home, not apartment, cleaning food containers and doing much more than most?
Scary!
Ralph Waldo Emerson Anticipating Dufus Donnie:
“Great men, great nations, have not been boasters and buffoons, but perceivers of the terror of life, and have manned themselves to face it.”
He’s a liar and shirker and incapable of sincerity or veracity.
Now he’s on TV today, blaming China and the WHO, for believing what the Chinese told them, for the serious consequences that followed. But Despicable Don was PRAISING the Chinese at that time. So, isn’t that a shit-assed way for him to act?
Keep saying he never lies, Dave.
That gets you the same amount of credibility’s energy gets; zilch.
I do not recall saying Trump never lies.
I have said that so far none of the lies Trump has told are of near the consequence of those of Obama or Bush or Pelosi or Schiff.
I have also said that most of the examples you produce of Trump lying ARE NOT.
In fact most of them are examples of the press, the left or YOU lying about Trump.
Please tell me once again that Carter Page is a russian asset ! Tulsi Gabbard too ?
Please tell me once again that Trump was not spied on !
Please tell me once again which of the gazillions of Press stories that Trump was colluding with the Russians are actually True ? Which of the gazillions of stories that “the walls are closing in” have proved true ? Jim Acosta is claiming exactly that right now.
Which walls would those be Jay ?
The PragerU video interviewing democrats in New York nearly all of whom would prefer to see this pandemic be worse – even much worse rather than see Trump re-elected are pretty telling.
From the start, it is not just that you have falsely accused Trump and others of things that were obviously horseshit. But that the only reason that any of this got any airplay is because you actually WANT this nonsense to be true. You WANT page to have been a russian asset, you WANT things to go to hell because of Trump.
I will say this once again.
In Nov. 2008 when Obama won the election I prayed two things.
That either everything I knew to be true about economics and big government would prove to be false and the steps that Obama took that everything I knew cried out would warm us would prove false, or in the alternative that Obama would grow to fill the shoes he was stepping into, and actually fix our problems.
Both prayers were left unanswered. Obama proved to be a very poor president.
Maybe a nice guy – though I am less sure about that.
But a lousy president.
From election day 2016 forward you and most of the left have been praying for Trump’s failure – no matter how many people that might harm. Now many of you are praying for peoples DEATHS – if that will get rid of Trump.
By January WHO was publicly urging countries to prepare for “containment, active surveillance, early detection, isolation, case management and contact tracing.”
Trump was telling us wrongly the virus would “work out well” and offering virus assistance to North Korea. That was a wishful misreading of the warnings he was getting from his own people.
Why does he keep putting his head up his butt? Yesterday he said he has “total” authority to decide how and when to reopen the economy. Today he said he PERSONALLY was going to call every governor of every state to give them authority to reopen. Isn’t that a lie in the making? Can you see him personally call 50 governors? 20? 10? Last month he instructed VP Pence not to reach out and call governor’s who aren’t appreciative of his efforts to fight the spread of the virus. Will Donnie only call those who kiss his ass, but now order the VP to call recalcitrants?
I just want to see factual reporting on him following up on his future try at a constitutional grab trying to force governors to open their economies when they dont feel confident to do so and have them take it to SCOTUS.
I could care less what Fox, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC ,NPR, New York Times, Wash Post, AP, UP, Facebook or the twit reports. When it happens and facts reported, not their news.
It is amazing the ignorance of the American public, including our president, when it comes to constitutional rights. I have been debating Trump supporters in N. C. that say he has complete authority to order our governor to lift all orders to close. The tenth amendment states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Although the federal government has attempted to take control of various activities of the states in the past, SCOTUS rulings have for the most part limited the authority of the federal government, particularly with regard to regulating commerce and taxes. Congress can change some things when it comes to interstate commerce, but that has not taken place to allow the president to force states to reopen.
If and when that happens, Trump get SCOTUS support or their decision overrides his open up orders, then that is fact. No social media comments, no tweets by twits, no media political manipulation.
No political arguments by people using their own facts.
This is going to be resolved fairly quickly.
It is not going to court.
Many governors have NOT shutdown their economies, many are talking about easing things already.
Trump and the people will put pressure on govenors and that pressure will build over time.
Further circumstances in each state are unique. New York is likely to be the last to re-open.
And that is appropriate.
To bad. Would love to witness SCOTUS taking Trump to the woodshed.
His stupidity of the constitution is unacceptable. How can he swear to uphold something he has no idea whats in it. The bill of rights, adding in the 14th is basic info.
The law – and therefore the courts punish ACTS not words.
SCOTUS will absolutely take Trump to the woodshed for unconstitutional ACTS.
There is no such thing as unconstitutional words.
In terms of ACTS, Trump is probably the most constitutionally conforming president in the past 100 years. That is why he rarely loses at SCOTUS and never 9-0 which was Common for Obama.
In terms of words – Trump is imprecise and inarticulate – in the constitutional and legal sense.
Many of us fault him on that – sometimes myself included.
But I am increasingly of the view that is not important.
I very much like what reporter Saleno Zito noted prior to the 2016 election.
Trump’s supporters take him seriously but not literally, Trump’s opponents take him literally but not seriously.
I do not think Trump cares alot about the type of legalistic precision in speech that Jay and the media and the left fixate on.
He quite bluntly refuses to get into those kinds of games with the press.
He does not “walk back” imprecise statements with the press. He does not engage in their word games, or try to explain or clarify.
As in the instance you are addressing. We can gather Trump’s understanding of his constitutional powers as president by his ACTIONS..
The purpose of his words was NOT to lay out some detailed plan. It was to communicate that it is important to move to safely restarting the economy and that he is going to do so ASAP balancing force and safety. Trump can not ORDER governors to do anything. But he has myriads of levers as president to persuade them to act. Is it absolutely necescary for Trump to spend 5 paragraphs telling reporters that have the constitutional authority to do something, but that he still has an enormous amount of leverage to persuade those who do have that authority to do as he wants ? Do we need to know in detail ahead of time exactly how he will negotiate with each individual governor ? Many of whom are likely in near full agreement with him, and even the rest only disagree as to timing ?
When Trump ACTS to defy the constitution – I am concerned. Thus far he rarely has, and never even close to outside the scope of conduct presidents since Washington have felt they were able to.
Pretty much everyone grasps that Trump is imprecise in his remarks – possibly deliberately so.
Further alot of what he says is for effect, more than a plan of action.
Does Trump know he does not have the authority to order governors to do anything ?
Probably – but if he does not – someone will tell him.
Regardless, I highly doubt that he is going to try.
I do not think there is much of a question here. If he actually tried – which I think there is close to zero chance of, the courts would shut him down near instantly.
What is more likely is that he IS going to call the 50 governors and try to persuade each to reopen.
I do not expect that process will be the same with each governor or in each state.
Nor do I think it will be binary.
Trump is going to spend the next several weeks trying to persuade 50 governors to take SOME steps towards undoing the shutdown.
Some states will move faster than others. Given that the conditions in each state are not the same that should not be surprising. Republicans are likely to move faster than democrats and less populous states faster than more populous one and states with less Covid19 faster than those with more.
If Trump said “he was brighter than the sun” the media would spend the next news cycle shouting “liar, liar pants on fire, experts say trump is only 80% as bright as the sun”
Can anyone here name a single major Trump directive of any kind that Trump lost 9:0 in the supreme court ?
There might be one, but I do not recall any. In fact that only SCOTUS loss I know of Trump was when he continued an Obama DOJ case that he could have dropped to SCOTUS and deliberately lost it
My point is that you can like or dislike Trumps actions, you can even claim some are unconstitutional – and I might agree.
But nothing that Trump has actually done is so egregious that SCOTUS thoroughly rebuked him – as they did Obama about a dozen times.
Fanned by the media, the left and Jay, we waste a great deal of time fretting and debating over nonsensically over broad interpretations of some quip Trump made presuming it is the equivalent of an executive order already on his desk that he has already signed.
Trump is going to be pushing to reopen the economy shortly.
There is going to be lots of pushing and shoving and politics.
It is going to happen.
It is going to take longer than it should.
But less time that healthcare experts would prefer.
Were are going to have all kinds of people on the left and the media telling us “he is killing people”, and we are likely to have some governors move slower than others.
We are not going to have a court case over this – atleast not some big constitutional crisis case.
I would also suggest that it is politically expedient for Trump to be pushing hard to reopen the economy – even if lots of health experts are opposed. And even if he does not succeed as fast as he wants.
The best political case for Trump is to be pushing ASAP. While facing lots of resistance,
Trump wins politically if things take more time that he wants and he has resistance, but Covid19 does not reflare up.
Trump is going to be painting himself as the savior of the working man, of minorities, and he is going to push democrats to oppose him. To pick safety over jobs.
And he wins politically even if he can not force governors and democrats to go as fast as he wants.
He may even push to go faster then we should – just to get democrats to oppose him.
The most significant aspect of the 2016 election was Trump flipped blue collar voters in a way no republican has ever done.
He has spent alot of his presidency flipping an ancient political narative – that Republicans are pro business and democrats are pro labor.
Immigration and trade are not left right issues. But they ARE labor/affluent issues.
And Trump has taken the side of labor and democrats have let him.
And all this nonsense of permanent democratic majorities goes down the tubes if Republicans pick up even and additional 10% of the minority vote.
And Trump is doing this right out in the open, and democrats are letting him.
Not only are they letting him. But they are letting him drag them into fights that are not in their interests.
Again please cite the specific remarks.
And I am looking for a consistent pattern.
You are making specific claims regarding WHO and Trump.
Who at WHO was saying these things ?
Taiwan, not the PRC seems to have been the first to inform the WHO of Covid19 in very late December.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/taiwan-accuses-who-of-failing-to-heed-warning-of-coronavirus-human-to-human-transmission/
BTW not only did Taiwan inform the WHO that Covid19 was in China in late December, but that is was passing Human to Human.
On January 14 2020 WHO tells all of us that it is not contagious.
Here is Wikipedia’s timeline for Covid19 – it is filled from begining to end with bad information form WHO.
It is pretty clear that Covid19 was already spreading throughout the world before WHO even sent anyone to China to gain information.
Someone in Jaoan was diagnosed with Covid19 in early January when China and WHO were claiming there were only 41 cases all in Wuhan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic_from_November_2019_to_January_2020
it is also pretty self evident from this that none of the earliest cases have any connection to the “wet markets”.
Yes, on January 24th after almost a month of completely bogus statements by China and WHO, Trump having been told that China had contained this said that it would work out well.
Should Trump have beleived WHO and China ? Didn;t you ?
Aren’t you constantly trying to sell the rest of us that we shoudl “trust the experts”.
So you are pissing on Trump because he did ?
As to Trump’s authority.
I will agree – Trump does not have all that much authority.
The largest authority in this type of situation resides with states.
So why are you constantly trying to blame Trump ?
Regardless, once again you fixate on words not actions.
But as is typical you conflate inaccuracy, or error or imprecision with malice.
Do you think Cuomo is going to do what Trump says just because he is president ?
What is your point here ?
What in the world is going to occur differently because of Trump’s remarks ?
“Isn’t that a lie in the making?”
There is no such thing.
If you take what he said as a promise, then in a few weeks it could prove to be a broken promise. But as of this moment it is nothing more than a small promise.
“Can you see him personally call 50 governors ?”
Yes,
“Last month he instructed VP Pence not to reach out and call governor’s who aren’t appreciative of his efforts to fight the spread of the virus. ”
Source ?
You still do not get that you have no credibility.
Just today you told me that no prominent democrats opposed Trump’s travel restrictions.
Yes the house judicary committee pass a bill condemning them.
Numerous “prominent” democrats attacked the Travel restrictions – until they started hiding from that.
There is a public statement by Pelosi condemning the travel restrictions on the speaker.gov web site.
Why should anyone beleive your assertions ?
Trump has been pummeling the cbhbinese since before he took office – you and your ilk have repeatedly and are even now calling him racist for continuing the pummel the chinese, and NOW you have the termidity to complain because he made a few pleasant remarks about China in the context of the trade deal ?
Did you pay the slightest attention to your Emerson quote ?
My daughter is chinese. You could not possibly have the degree of empathy for China that I have.
That does not excuse the fact that the chinese government did precisely what government – especially big ACTUALLY authoratarian governments do and tried to stupidly supress information that would cast them in an unfavorable light, hoping against hope that some miracle would not result in that making things worse.
As to the WHO – it is pretty much THEIR JOB to get exactly this right.
We might expect countries like China to hide the truth.
The WHO exists both to help where help is needed and to assure that the world actually knows what is going on when some regime tries to bury a risk to the entire planet.
I have far more problems with the WHO than China. I do not expect much from China.
If Trump is chastizing the WHO – they deserve it. As does Xi and the chinese government.
As to your criticism of Trump – what part of that does not apply to every single other world leader ? And every single national disease control administration ?
You are absolutely correct, Trump beleived the WHO and Chinese when he should not have.
But you seem to miss the fact that weeks before anyone else, the scales fell from Trump’s eyes.
Is it possible that a different leader would have done better than Trump ?
Sure. Biden ? Sanders ? Clinton ? Obama ? Bush ? Please name the person who would have done better ? Even all these health experts you love so much – whether they are Trump’s experts – Faucci and Brix or the IHME or Imperial College or WHO or …..
ALL were universally BEHIND Trump is recognizing this problem.
So yes, maybe there is one in a thousand people who would have responded better than Trump. But you can not name a single one, and none of them are or were presidents or candidates for president.
We can debate PRECISELY what Biden meant in mid March when he called Trump a xenophobe in the context of the travel restrictions.
But there is no context in which is does not make Biden even more of a dupe than you claim Trump is.
And yes world leaders (and lots of other people) praise people in one breath and act against them with the next.
You fixate on the fact that Trump often says nice things about Putin.
But you are completely blind to the fact that Trump’s policies are nearly universally contrary to russian interests, while Obama and Clinton’s policies were favorable to Russia – whether they were pissing on Russia or sucking up to Putin depending on the moment.
Griffin’s question is a typical reporters gotcha.
It serves no purpose. At the time it was to Trump AND the countries benefit to praise china. It is not now. It likely will be again in the future.
In the real world there is not just black and white.
In the real world China could both have worked well with Trump on a trade deal AND been deceptive about Covid19. Real people understand that.
People who are honest with themselves also understand that China is a totalitarian regime.
But one that we have to work with. That the Chinese govenment will lie.
Presumably you are atleast familiar enough with the afghan papers to know that OUR government has been lying to us about the mideast. Of course they have also been lying about CrossFire Huricane, and the SC investigation. And lots of other things.
Governments lie alot. We should change that.
But it is incredibly disingenuous to pretend that is new.
The Afghan papers are from the Bush and Obama administrations, the Pentagon papers are from Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson.
I have little doubt that our government lies far less than China – do you disagree ?
Yet I can write a long list of really big lies our government has told us.
Maybe we need to send everyone over 21 born in America to the same classes as naturalized citizens go through.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/04/first-amendment-fail-raleigh-police-department-do-not-think-protesting-is-an-essential-right/?fbclid=IwAR21bCYj-MjDbvjp3SODswZcNDwu9TEsH6zi5pPt4KDaCFVO5mxrk_X8Jj0
North Carolina is going to be interesting when it comes to reopening processes. We have 100 counties and 20 of those have 60%+ of the total cases. One county alone has 20% (Charlotte and surrounding area), another has 10% (Raleign and surrounding area). 50 of the counties or 50% have 20 cases or less. 26 of those have less than 10. The county i live in has had 123 total cases, with 87 either recovered or death, leaving 36 known active cases. Translating that to some factor like 5 times more people have or have had it means less than 200 in a county of 1M would be active. Compare that to Charlotte where thousands would still be active.
So how we reopen N.C. with a handful of large met. areas compared to California where people are crambed in like sardines in the majority of the state is very different. Even residential areas here have large lots for the most part, where many homes in California when I left southern California years age you could spit out you window into the house next door.
but even given that, most mayors and county commissioners here have extended stay at home regulations to mid May. I suspect that with cases continuing to rise in Charlotte and Raleigh, that will become statewide for all the state and probably through May 31. Our Gov. is one that was in the first to act and given his actions, will be one of the last to act.
Hopefully we can rectify that come Nov.
Ron, I looked it up, lumber and hardware stores are open for business in NC. You have said that you can make anything out of wood (perhaps you can make a nice end table out of The Donald’s uncluttered wooden head since he is not using it for anything useful). Now is your chance to go on a spree! Stock up on lumber and tools and start the creative forces flowing. Rebuild or build new cabinets, a shed, make furniture! A canoe, you ever done one of those? Now is the time! My good friend, who is the CEO of a company that makes famous wood stoves, built himself a very beautiful classic wooden motor boat brought the 40s-50s back to life. Extremely impressive.
Try something like that.
All this kvetching that you are being restricted by the Governor (and after posting the story of the young lady living in isolation who still got COVID). The person who is most restricting you is yourself, you have restricted yourself to bitchin about realities that are much larger than your powers.
Some people will find an opportunity in this time, others will resent everything.
Which type would I want on my side in a tough time?
So people should not be allowed to protest government.
Should not be allowed to run alone on the beach ?
Should not be allowed to shoot hoops alone ?
Should not be allowed to play softball alone with their daughter ?
All because some woman in isolation managed to get Covid19 ?
Grow up, perfect safety is not possible.
You are free to live in fear for yourself.
You can not constrain the choices of others – because of your fears – not even your REASONABLE fears.
I am pretty well off. I mostly work from home. I also have health and age issues sufficient to make me more cautious than a 20 year old should be.
The impact of this on me has been an INCREASE in my productivity.
But my tenants as an example are not as well off as I, they are younger, healthier, and they have jobs that can not be done from their home. They are being hit hard by this – harder by the shutdown than by the disease.
Why do you insist that the choices that you and I make freely for ourselves – with little negative impact, MUST be the law that applies to others ?
You are confusing safety with narcissism, possibly even malignant narcisism.
Ultimately the govenrment is not capable of finding the measures each of us needs to balance our safety with our other needs. It can not do that because one size does not fit all.
As I noted in another post – my governor just issued a bunch of draconian new rules.
I commend him – in that the purpose is to get Businesses ReOpened.
but from before the shutdown, in my community most businesses were ALREADY doing many of the things the governor has just made rules.
Further they did so commensurate with the resources available at the moment.
Changing what they did as resources became available.
Nearly every store in my country that is open complies with every new rule the govenor has announced – and has for atleast 2 weeks. Many of them have done even MORE.
One of the reasons that I consider you a lefty is that you do not seem to beleive that people, stores, businesses, customers will work our for themselves reasonable choices regarding there conflicting values and threats.
We all want to keep safe. We also want to eat. There are an infinite number of things we want, and we can not have them all. But we can decide as individuals what is important to us AT THIS MOMENT – and that includes safety.
There are no one size fits all solutions to these problems.
Just to be clear – in order to fail to protect some woman living in isolation, you are fully prepared to prevent the entire country from engaging in activities that there is not a single expert that thinks have any consequential risk.
I Robby world it is OK to stop people from running alone on the beach – not because that has any effect at all. But just because “rules are rules” and “people might die”.
You want each of us to be happy because never mind that some of us may soon be unable to feed ourselves, we are still all free to build boats in our free time at home. Or atleast those of us who have the resources and skills and space to build a boat. Just screw the rest.
Just to be clear – no one is saying that people should not take care of themselves.
Only that decisions regarding how should be left to individuals not government.
“Which type would I want on my side in a tough time?”
No one will be on your side. They will be six feet away.
Beyond that you do not seem to grasp that everyone does not have the opportunities you do.
Read your own remarks – you are like Marie Antoinette telling the french peasants when the bread has run out (because of stupid laws limiting the price of bread) to “let them eat cake”.
My tenants should take this time when they are confined to apartments that are a couple of hundred square foot at most, to listen to opera, paint, engage in woodworking.
You and those on the left spend their lives smearing “greedy business people”.
But one thing that most people in business – particularly those businesses that deal with ordinary people learn quickly, is to figure out what OTHER PEOPLE want and need.
Because it is hard to sell others on YOUR needs. That businesses succeed by figuring out the wants and needs of their customers and meeting those better and cheaper than anyone else. The fundimental paradigm of business is the ability to grasp the wants and needs of others.
I would suggest that there is a reason that the vast majority of people are not in business.
Because among the myriads of skills necescary to succeed – HIGH on the list of manditory skills is being sensitive to the ACTUAL wants and needs of others.
Not presuming everyone is the same as you are.
I am glad you are fortunate. That this is not impacting you much.
I am similarly fortunate.
But i am fundimentally different in a very important way.
I do not presume that everyone else is me. That everyone has the same talents, skills, interests, to thrive under constraints that favor me.
Think of how this impacts others besides yourself.
For clarity my friend is not that Gouda fellow, the boats on pinterest were just an example.
“How do we …?”
It should be obvious that what is needed in NYC is not the same as the rest of the country.
That what is needed in Raleigh is not the same as the rest of the state,
That what is needed in some country seat is not the same as the rest of the county.
Put simply the president, the governor, the mayor can not concoct rules that will work broadly.
Ultimately we have to start to trust people to make good choices.
We can provide them with guidance, but we can not make binding rules that will work – even in a single town, much less the country.
Today the benchmark price for oil hit $19.82 mid day. With that news, Exxon Mobil announced they were laying off 242 House members and 43 Senators. They stated more could come if the prices did not improve.😈😂😂
Amen!!
Rights are something that you have NO MATTER WHAT!.
To the extent that under any circumstances government is allowed to infringe on those rights.
That infringement MUST be the lease infringing possible – even if that means that the work of government is harder, and it MUST be neutral.
So Government can not shutdown protests against government EVER.
Ultimately we MUST eventually come to the understanding that Govenrment is NOT their to protect people from themselves. It is exists only to protect individuals from OTHERS.
If people make choices that “experts” or “government” beleive are unwise or dangerous – whether that is a few individuals or large groups. That is their right.
It is always going to be the case that a small portion of people make stupid choices, and some of them are harmed by those.
Nothing can actually be done about that. Making bad choices illegal does little to stop people from making bad choices – 10’s of thousands of people committ suicide each year – even though it is illegal. Millions of people take drugs illegally everyday.
We can not afford the amount of law enforcement it would take to stop that, and we can not afford the loss of liberty that would be required.
Laws and regulations have near zero preventive effects unless they are vigorously enforced.
And zero tolerance enforcement of ALL existing laws would turn the US into the most draconian police state that ever existed overnight – if we could afford the taxes to pay for and find the number of people needed to vigorously enforce all laws.
The massive regulatory state depends on voluntary compliance. Worse it depends on voluntary compliance with laws most of us do not even know exist.
We STILL have very good compliance – not because people are inherently law abiding.
But because the majority of us are NOT stupid. We comply with environmental laws NOT because we know the law, or because it is vigorously enforced. but because we actually care about the quality of our environment. We make out workplaces safer – because we care about the people who work with us and for us. Not because our bosses are afraid of OSHA.
Any law that is disregarded by more than a tiny portion of people SHOULD NOT EXIST.
Even if it otherwise seems reasonable. No law should exist if we are unwilling to require government to vigorously enforce it. Discretion does NOT belong with government or the police or prosecutors. It belongs to PEOPLE. If a law requires applying it with discretion – it should not exist.
My state has just issued a revised set of Covid19 response rules. Nearly all of these are reasonable. But the overwhelming majority are things that ordinary people and businesses are ALREADY DOING. Further these new rules suffer from multiple problems – the first being micromanagement – it is not truly possible to specify in minute detail the way that a retail sale should safely take place. Ron likes to talk about “common sense”. I constantly point out that there is no “common” agreement on what common sense is.
The most effective way to determine what is “safe” as an example in a retail transaction is what the customer and clerks choose to do voluntarily.
My daughter worked at Target, she came home each day to 2 older parents in the moderate risk group, and a fiancee that is a cancer survivor. She repeatedly asked Target for permission to wear gloves, frequently sanitize her hands, and to be allowed to wear a mask when dealing with customers. Each of these is things that the local Costco – and numerous other retailers had already done. Target refused. Now the Governor has ordered what she wanted. BUT before the governor’s order, my daughter told Target that as they would not allow her to work safely that she was taking a leave of absence.
What Ron calls “common sense” is what Common people work out on their own – without government.
As a customer – I can choose not to go to checkouts where the clerk does not have a shield and face masks. As a clerk I can choose not to work in places where I am not allowed to do what I personally beleive I need to be safe. As a store I need to balance making the store safe for customers, safe for staff, and also able to effectively conduct business under whatever the current circumstances. And if I make the wrong choices – customers might go to walmart or Costco.
I do not want to piss over my governor – though he is on the wrong side of things – his new rules are closing the door after the cow is out of the barn.
These things needed to be done long ago – and by most people WERE DONE AS SOON AS THEY WERE POSSIBLE.
Government can not respond fast enough, and it can not tailor rules to the specifics of every problem and every situation.
Good intentions on the part of government do not make complex problems that must be addressed case by case become amenable to broad sweeping rules.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/04/first-amendment-fail-raleigh-police-department-do-not-think-protesting-is-an-essential-right/
Excellent story by Turley,
The point of which is NOT that Covid19 originated from Chinese laboratories,
But that we have seen the media – and purported fact check organizations completely dismissive of ANYTHING that does not fit their narative.
Reporters do not report the facts. They pick and choose what fits their world view, and dismiss ANYTHING that is at odds with that as “debunked”.
On issue after issue, in the past several years right wing conspiracy theorists have proven to be correct – or at the very least credible.
At this time there is no clear evidence of precisely where Covid19 came from.
It may have come from the “wet markets” – though that is increasingly unlikely as the earliest known patients had no connection to the market.
It might have come from bats.
It might have come from pangolins.
It might have come from Labs in Wuhan.
But those call bat shit crazy because they did not beleive whatever the media picked as a narative are owed an appology.
We do not know enough to say they were right.
But we do know enough to say they were not crazy or that their propositions were no “debunked”
Given all the issues the media and the left has been wrong about that were purportedly “debunked” aparently “debunked” means TRUE.
But this just goes to support the other argument I have made that the left engages in word games.
When you mangle the meaning of words – like “debunked” you destroy our ability to communicate.
The free market strikes again with a way to reuse all PPE up to 20 times.
This is a near perfect example of the appropriate thinking in times of crisis.
As CDC notes – it is a bad idea to re-use PPE. Modern medical technology is pretty much designed arround the concept of throwing things away. To that end we produce myriads of medical supplies far cheaper than ever before and intended for only a single use.
And normally that is extremely wise. It is safer and healthier.
But extremely rare events call for different approaches.
It is also unwise to stockpile massive amounts of supplies for a crisis.
These supplies have a short shelf life and The stockpile would possibly be larger than the yearly normal use for the country – and it would have to be replaced every 18 months.
Re-using something not designed for reuse is an excellent temporary solution.
The cleaned disposable equipment is a poor choice when new replacements are available.
But an excellent choice to deal with short term surges.
If masks can be cleaned 20times before failure that reduces the consumption of masks by a factor of more than 10.
These Trailers have been made and are being used. This crisis will end.
When it does they can be stored and the cleaning trailers maintained for much lower cost than storing 100M masks, and they will be available again on short notice for the next crisis should one come.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/dinner-table-chat-between-husband-wife-may-help-solve-coronavirus-n1183716?cid=eml_nbn_20200415
Jay,
Here is a newsweek article – did newsweek get bought by Breitbart or Murdock ?
Regardless the article ends with Observations about how incredibly difficult it will be to fix the WHO. Missing the blantantly obvious. Start something new.
The US and european nations can form a new global health organization. They can easily fund it from money they give to WHO now, and they can trivially destroy WHO by allowing this new organization to propose reporting and transparency standards that nations must comply with in order to have access to unrestricted travel within the US and european countries.
https://www.newsweek.com/how-bush-obama-ceded-world-health-organization-china-increasing-risk-pandemics-like-coronavirus-1497667
Jay,
Trump has suspended funding to WHO for 60-90 days demanding that Beijing and WHO come clean about what they knew when they knew it and why this was not caught earlier.
And democrats and Pelosi are actually threatening to take this to court and fight it ?
Others are comparing this the Ukraine mess.
You constantly tell me that Trump is stupid. Are democrats FAR STUPIDER ?
You tried this nonsense that WHO had NOT botched this earlier.
I dumped on you a SMALL portion of the evidence to the contrary – as well as that democrats had OPPOSSED even the few measures Trump actually took.
Is there someone out there that really thinks it is a bad idea for Trump to demand answers from Xi and WHO ?
Whether you like Trump or not, whether you think Trump screwed up with Covid19 or not, it should be crystal clear to anyone that we got bad information from the start from WHO and China. And the reasons for that need investigated.
I have read atleast one analysis that suggests that if Trump had restricted Travel 6 days earlier it is likely we would have been able to stop this.
I am not so sure that is true. There is increasing evidence this got to the US in late December or Early January.
Regardless, I have zero problem with Pelosi investigating the Trump administrations handling of this – oversight is congresses job. I suspect that Pelosi will be more interested in scoring political points than finding what went wrong (and what went right). but oversight is still congresses job. And they should be judged on how they do it.
But it is also important to determine how things went wrong with Beijing and WHO so that we do not repeat the same mistakes.
I think what I have seen through this is that we can handle crisises like this. That we also can probably figure out how to avoid or mitigate them in the future.
But we have to examine what has been done. What worked, What did not. What could be better.
Regardless where are YOU Jay ?
Should we trust the WHO ? Should it police itself ?
There was another interesting bit in the NewsWeek WHO article.
The WHO is secretive and claims that providing more data in real time is bad for science.
Where have we heard this nonsense before ?
Oh, the CAGW nonsense.
Real Science is the result of publishing methods, and data so that the results can be analyzed and replicated, and if they can not be replicated the claims are invalid.
Real Science is not the concensus of experts – that is religion not science.
Here is that neo-nazi alt-right group reason on the WHO
Child abuse reports have dropped by 50% – but there is good reason to beleive that actual child abuse is on the rise due to the “shutdown”.
Reports are likely down because children are isolated from doctors nurses, teachers, and people who would report signs of abuse.
We wasted thousands of posts here debating Whether Kavanaugh should be confirmed for the Supreme Court based on Dr, Ford’s allegations.
Now Biden faces an allegation distinguishable from that facing Kavanaugh only in that the Biden allegation is newer and the misconduct alleged against Biden was not that of a Drunk college student but a middle aged adult engaged in a political campaign.
I personally react to Biden and his accuser int he same way as Trump and his accusers and Kavanaugh and his accuser.
I choose to impossibly beleive everyone. It is probable that in all these instances someone is either lying or confused. But it is impossible to determine who.
Biden absolutely deserves the benefit of the doubt regarding these allegations.
But so do Trump and Kavanaugh.
At the same time as this article points out – Biden was the lead person for Obama’s disasterous Title XI reforms. And for that hypocracy he absolutely should be judged badly.
As Justice Hale noted in 1734
“it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent”
We have due process because it is ultimately better that 10 guilty go free than one innocent is punished.
Biden is entitled to the benefit of the doubt regarding the allegations against him.
But he and the press and the left should all be held to account for their hypocracy.
As well as anyone here who would treat Biden or his accuser differently from Trump and his accusers or Kavanaugh and his accusers.
https://www.city-journal.org/biden-campaign-due-process
You out there Priscilla? I hope all is well?
She posted here last week; said she was ok…
I do not know why it is so hard for so many to understand – but the health of the economy is quite LITERALLY a matter of life and death.
There is no magic bullet that will kill off Covid19 and save lives, that will not also result in not just massive suffering inflicted on millions of people – but even actual deaths, and probably much more than from Covid19 itself.
It is becoming increasingly evident that ALL governments have “screwed up”.
That a much better approach was to protect the most vulnerable.
There are more deaths among people over 100 globally than under 30, there are more deaths among people over 90 than those under 50.
For the vast majority of people Covid19 is either the same or even LESS consequential than the flu. But to a very small portion of people – those with diabetes, high blood pressure an assortment of serious pre-existing conditons that are especially common in older people, Covid19 is a very serious threat to their lives. The same is also true of the flue and colds, but it appears to be much worse for Covid19.
We would have been far better off instead of quasi quarantining the entire population, much more rigidly quarantining two groups – those actually sick, and those at risk.
That MIGHT have resulted in more Covid19 deaths – though done well it might have resulted in LESS. But it would have resulted in far less overall harm – including deaths from other causes.
To Jay and others who want to blame Trump for everything – Go for it!!!
But lets not be hypocritical – we can also blame the left, the media, the experts, democrats, and absolutely – LOTS of republicans.
Regardless, we have failed. It is likely that we have done more harm than good in our Covid19 forced shutdown.
Maybe some of us will learn from this, that you can rant all you want about “saving lives”
but the 2nd and third and 4th order effects of almost every good thing you do through government are nearly always negative, much harder to clearly see, but also larger than the first order positive effects.
I have very little doubt that the aggressive response by governments arround the world though late still resulted in less Covid19 deaths than doing nothing.
At the same time, it is likely that that same response resulted in MORE total deaths over the long run, and possibly the short run. and came with significant costs beyond just killing people.
I expect a quick recovery. But we will never get back the losses that occured during the shutdown. And no matter how much government money you dump into the economy – it is only Money. The health of the economy is how much of what we want and need that we produce. No amount of money will ever change that. Further we have erased 10 years of job gains in a few weeks and we are not done yet.
A quick recovery will put many of those back to work. BUT NOT ALL, further the hardest hit will be the last hired, the ones who were unemployed most of the past decade and only recently were able to get work. The previously hopeless are hopeless again.
And we did this to ourselves – not Covid19
I do not know what it takes for people to grasp that government is really pretty bad at all this.
It is bad at healthcare in all forms. It is bad at everything having to do with the economy.
Honestly even the few things that government is essential for – such as law enforment, it is still bad at. It is never a good idea to expand the scope of government into things people can do for themselves. There are very very few instances where no matter how badly free individuals perform on their own, the net harm when government takes over is not much worse.
A couple short comments.
1. If the politician in office takes minimal action, they don’t get reelected.
2. No one knows how many people have had this. We will never know how many had it. I have heard from family that many friends of their’s who have had the symptoms such as loss of taste and then a husband catching it from that wife having high fever and shortness of breath just stayed home, recovered and never reported anything. My county, almost 1M in population has 125 reported cases. Who the heck believes that govt figure. Just using the state average per million we should have at least 575 reported cases. And the state average is severely understated. In a couple years after many months of research, I would not be surprised of 100M already had this stuff when its over (if that happens).
3. Testing will be a Trump failure, but anyone with half a brain cell should understand the President does not run the daily operations of the CDC. Maybe if he had had someone better than f’up Fauci, CDC would have tested their test kits and found that the crap they bought did not work. Is that on trump or the CDC?
4. Now for the anti-Trump comment. Trump had these governors by the crotch. he said he had complete authority to open up business. everyone screamed and hollered “no he does not, states rights”. He backs off, now anything that could go wrong is on the governors if they open too early. He reeled them in like a fishing boat captain. Now governors are saying may 15th, etc. He can’t shut the ___ up. So if one opens Apriil 30th and their cases explode, all they need to do is say “Trump put pressure on us to open”
Time for the peace and quite of Sleepy Joe.
What the F does Fauci have to do with the CDC, Ron?
You have something against Italians from Brooklyn?
We sane Centrists like and respect him.
OK, who is that guy that comes out with the Trump Show and gives updates on where we are each day? Who gives interviews on all the news programs? So maybe I should have said some other gov’t agency and not CDC. It aint W.H.O. so maybe its N.I.H.
So maybe its not Fauci, maybe its someone else. But some lifer at some agency that had test kits did not insure the test kits worked. Thats on them! Lifers, not politicians.
And I am not positive, but I would be willing to wager most test kits came from China.
Test kits are cotton balls on a stick, with a sealed tube to stuff them into.
The test failure was at the CDC. The Test kits are a straw man and have nothing to do with the problem. A couple of qtips and a test tube make up a test kit.
Also included in the test kits were reagents that go into the machines. From an article attached.
“New York State lab officials also passed on the news, according to documents and interviews. “There is a technical problem in one of the reagents which invalidates the assay and will not allow us to perform the assay,” the lab director of New York State’s Wadsworth Center, Jill Taylor, wrote to state health officials in an email that same night.”
My question. Who was in charge and who did not run quality control on these test kits to find the reagents gave inaccurate data.
Jay is going to say that is Trumps responsibility. I say the buck stops there, but the problem is at the CDC and FDA and the lifer employees that created the monster that has so much red tape nothing gets done. Someone ASS should be fired! (At the CDC or FDA, voters can fire Trump in November)
This is a very good recap of the crap that goes on in government (outside politics) today.
But then, this comes from the Complainer-In-chief” when it comes to anything civil service, so take it with what ever grain of salt you wish.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2020/04/03/coronavirus-cdc-test-kits-public-health-labs/?arc404=true
Did government screw up ? Absolutely – they always do.
I am not sure that your article is on point though – a complaint by a state lab is about a test done by the state. CDC has not been doing many tests in a long time.
I have no idea whether your reagent issue was a state test kit or a federally provided test kit. I assume the former.
I also have no idea why there would be reagents int he test kit.
The samples need to be taken and they need put into a sterile container. You do not want to put ANYTHING else with them unless you must. There are already multiple different tests.
As there should be. Anything that you mix with the sample that MIGHT make sense for one lab test is near certain to interfere or preclude others.
Regardless, if you want or need widespread testing – go completely private – get DC and NYC as far out of it as possible.
Private businesses make mistakes. But they fix them FAST. Government is incredibly slow to do anything – even doing things right. Private actors can usually screw up 3 times before getting something right and STILL beat government to better results.
I am not going to touch the regent question – there are too many facts we do not know, and adding reagents to test kits is almost certainly a bad idea.
Just open up private testing even further.
If they screw up atleast you can hold them accountable.
Good luck holding government accountable ever.
Trump ? CDC ? New York ? Who knows ? All of the above ?
Does it matter ? No one will be held accountable.
I would hardly call you sane and centrist.
But more pigs are flying.
I like Faucci too. But I have different expectations than you. I want an expert like him providing me with ADVICE. I would not ever give him or anyone like him actual CONTROL over anything.
I can like and respect people who provide me advice.
I can choice to follow their advice.
But change it from advice to control – and they are tyrants.
I do not expect my advisors to be perfect – and Faucci has made plenty of mistakes.
But if you take control of other peoples lives – you must be perfect – even that is not enough.
While I backpedaled on Testing, I did not back over a cliff.
Testing is only a tool for prevention in Very narrow cases.
1). Early on as a means of identifying people you missed at the border.
2). Slightly later as a means of identifying people who might have come in contact with an infected person.
Once you lose control of the border, testing rapidly becomes a useless prevention tool.
If you have symptoms – STAY HOME, it does not matter what you have. Flu, Cold, Covid19.
Once you have 10’s of thousands of people with this. Testing is merely about statistics. It is not about treatment. It is not about prevention.
Better testing right now would tell us ONE thing. Is the mortality rate 1.3% or is it 0.05% or somewhere between. It would answer whether 1% of the country got this without symptoms, or 5% or 15%.
It it is 15% then this is just the flu. and it is not fading because we locked down the country, it is fading because it has gone as far as it can.
Did Trump F’up testing ? Well the CDC did, and the buck stops at the resolute desk and that is Trump.
Did it matter ? Probably not. It MIGHT have mattered had “the experts” not trusted WHO, and China and acted more quickly.
regardless, you can stop these things if you can get them early. We did not k now about this early enough to act.
I will agree that Trump set the governor’s up.
But I do not see it playing out as you do.
First. MAYBE there is a 2nd wave in august. We shall see. There is too much we do not know.
But today there are pretty good indications that the “shutdown” was little more than a “feel good” measure.
Sweden did not lock down the country, they made recomendations, which the swedes have LOOSELY followed and they are on the same trajectory as we are. As are numerous other countries that either had no shutdown or where government can issue edicts but the people will do as they please. Put simply this has gone through most of the world in much the same way – regardless of the measures that different countries have taken.
There is some good youtube videos modeling the effects of different measures.
Shutdowns do not work. they do not change the area under the curve, they just change the time that the disease takes to spread through the country.
It is likely we could have done no more than voluntary measures and already be past this now, without having destroyed the economy.
Regardless, you do not have to believe what I have said above.
Politically there is only one outcome Trump loses, and probably he can manage that.
Different states are going to start opening up – starting now.
If that does not prove disasterous, it is the governors that stay locked down the longest who look the worst. And Trump will go into the summer and the fall as the person who wanted to move more agressively to reopen, faster.
A total of 60% of 600 confirmed sailors testing positive for Covid aboard the USS Roosevelt have not shown any symptoms yet, the Navy found: young asymptomatic carriers, ticking time bombs?
https://nypost.com/2020/04/16/navys-coronavirus-tests-reveal-stealth-spread-among-young-healthy-sailors/
Please re-read what you wrote. It makes no sense.
Are there 600 confirmed sailors ? I beleive everyone on Roosevelt was a confirmed sailor.
As to 60% having no symptoms. That is fully consistent with information we are getting elsewhere. That does not mean they are “‘ticking time bombs”. It does not alter the spread of the disease at all. It does not represent a change in the nature of the disease.
What is suggests is there are 1.5M cases of Covid19 in the US not 689K.
What it suggests is the mortality rate is far lower.
What it suggests is that this is far more like the flu and far less like Ebola or SARS.
What it suggests is that Crozier would have had no problems maintaining the rediness of Roosevelt, that he paniced over nothing.
Feds charge doctor who cited Trump to push hydroxychloroquine ‘miracle cure’
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/17/us/doctor-charged-hydroxychloroquine-trump/index.html
Dave-John: should we start up a Go-Fund-Me site to raise money for this guy’s defense? If we get him free of the charges you can buy a kit to test your preventative assertions about the meds.
“Staley’s purported medical package included dosages of hydroxychloroquine, antibacterial drug Azithromycin, antianxiety treatments, intravenous drips, and the use of a medical hyperbaric oxygen chamber. Staley offered to sell the items as a family pack for $3,995, according to the criminal complaint.’
He was also ready to throw in some Viagra and Xanax, for a few bucks more…
I know your response will reek with indignation at government interfering with citizens’ right to buy and use whatever medication they want. And I agree – Viagra & Xanax should be available across the counter, definitely now with forced stay at home pressures bubbling up repressed sexuality and anxiety/
Extract from our local PBS station WFDD.FM. Very interesting.
“Prison officials say a COVID-19 outbreak at a North Carolina state prison has spread to more than 250 inmates. State prisons Commissioner Todd Ishee said during a media briefing that 259 inmates had tested positive as of Friday afternoon at Neuse Correctional Institution, a state prison in Goldsboro. He said none were hospitalized and that 98% of those testing positive were asymptomatic. All 700 inmates have been tested but some test results are pending. Newly positive inmates are being put into isolation, and the state is sending additional medical and security staff to the facility.”
So this indicates that the asymptomatic population can be far greater than anything already suggested. And if that is the case, just how many people have had this stuff? NY City could have a million+ and not even know it.
The larger the number of asymptomatic people the lower the mortality rate and the more this looks like the flu. It also means the less effective were the measures we have taken.
Reason guide to making your own mask. Pretty funny.
Any idea why I get so many “unavailable” when clicking your posts?
I can click on the link in your reply and it brings up the video in youtube, so I do not know why.
Youtube has been know to play games with PragerU video’s and I am pretty sure they blocked on of those I linked sometime ago.
But the one you are having trouble with is a tongue in cheek short from reason that should offend no one and get a few laughs.
Further the link is working for me.
Interesting, when I click from the e-mail or from the actual WordPress thread I get unavailable. I have no reason to think they would be blocking me. I never go to that site.
I do not beleive reason is being blocked, further there is nothing about this video that should offend anyone. It is barely political, and certainly not left right. It is libertarians showing they hav e a sense of humor about themselves.
I think this is a technical problem. I was able to click on the link in the email that WP sent me with your reply that the video was unavailable and it took me straight to the video.
I do not know what to tell you.
I do not put it past google and youtube to be stupid. I just do not hink in this instance they are.
Every single report indicated very large numbers of otherwise unreported cases should be taken as a very good sign.
It means that: This virus has a far lower mortality than current statistics indicate.
If there are twice as many people who test positive in random tests as are reported in the GP, then the mortality is 1/2 what the statistics show. If there are 10 times as many positive tests then the mortality is 1/10 as high.
There have been large numbers of random tests, As well as a few other sources of peak infections rates. Current JHU Data has US infections at 0.2% of the population.
A large block of randomized testing are producing consisten results globally that in most places just under 4% of the population gets infected – that is a factor of 20 difference.
Would radically reduce the mortality rate. BUT there are a smaller number of ranomized tests that are coming up with a 15% infection rate. That is just under a factor of 100 difference. We also know from the assorted cruise ships and now some navy data that under near optimal conditions for spreading Covid19 that at most 20% of people ulimately test positive. There does not seem to be any evidence from anywhere showing an infection rate of even a contained population of greater than 20%.
That strongly suggests there are natural barriers – either a significant portion of people have some natural immunity or there are other factors that preclude extremely widespread infection.
This has been a problem with many of the models from the start. There is no disease anywhere ever that infects 100% of the population. The peak infection rate from the flu is about 27% – that was the 1918 H1N1 flu. That also had unusually high mortality and was unusual in that it killed people with strong immune systems not weak ones – it killed more 20 year old men than 60 year olds.
Regardless, for reasons that we do not understand very very few infectious diseases of any kind – even ones FAR more infectuous than Covid19 ever hit much more than 20% of the population.
Distributions are also different in different environments – Cruise ships and Naval vessels have the maximum infection rate. Which for Covid19 appears to be about 20%.
Large cities with dense populations will have much higher infection rates than elsewhere.
This also appears to flash through elderly populations in nursing homes like wildfire and kills a disproptionate number of elderly patients.
At the same time its spread in small towns and rural areas is much lower.
All of these are to be expected.
I expect that as we learn more in the post mortem the conclusions are going to be that the “shutdown” did little or no good. I doubt we will see significant differences in mortality or infection from countries that shutdown and those that did not. It will be particularly interesting to see differences between Sweden where there are NO government mandated changes, but the government is making much the same social distancing recomendations as the CDC, and the Swedes are somewhat compliant. So far they are no seeing much difference from the US.
Other things to look for is how this hits less developed countries. Death rates will be higher due to poorer medical facilities. But thus far we do not seem to be seeing high infection rates in places like Africa. One thesis is that Chloroquines are regularly taken in those countries as malaria preventives. Another is that the Southern hemisphere is exiting Summer, and the virus is seasonal.
We also know this thing targets men – I think 70% of the deaths are men.
There is some hints that blood type may be a factor.
There are also increasing suggestions this is more of a blood disease than a respiratory disease – that Ventalators are probably the wrong choice as the issue is not failure of oxygen to get from the lungs into the blood, but reduction in the ability of the blood to carry oxygen.
We are seeing Covid19 patients with blood oxygen levels that are supposed to be near death, who are NOT having physical difficulty breathing. We are putting them on Ventalators when they do not have trouble breathing because they have the very low blood oxygen levels of ARDS patients but they do not have the impaired lung function of ARDS patients.
Dave, “Other things to look for is how this hits less developed countries. Death rates will be higher due to poorer medical facilities. But thus far we do not seem to be seeing high infection rates in places like Africa. One thesis is that Chloroquines are regularly taken in those countries as malaria preventives. Another is that the Southern hemisphere is exiting Summer, and the virus is seasonal”
Interesting. Guess the Africans are much stronger than white Americans.We keep hearing from the MSM that taking hydroxychloroquine is bad for your health long term and should not be taken. That would be a good scientific study. What does the black race have genetically that precludes them from long term damage that whites do not have. Maybe their skin pigmentations? (Sarcasm, don’t reply)
If the MSM is saying Hoxcl is bad for you – they are full of it.
This is possibly one of the most widely used medications in the world. It is as safe as aspirin.
With the caveat that if aspirin were developed today it would be a persciption drug.
There are a few know side effects of hoxcl. They are incredibly rare, but for A FEW specific patients they should be taken into account.
Yes you can kill yourself by overdosing on hoxcl – you can overdose on ANYTHING – including water.
It also appears the propholactic dose is incredibly low, something like 400mg PER MONTH.
I think there is more than enough data at this point to say hoxcl provides a benefit to Covid19 patients. But it is way too early to claim it is a “cure”.
We are also starting to see preliminary results from Remedsivir. Again these are not controled studies. They loook very very similar to the hoxcl studies – same type of trial same scale same ways to measure results. I beleive that remedsivir appears to be more effective than hoxcl based on my non expert comparisons of youtube videos of research doctors exploring the results of these studies. Remedsivir appears to have immediate positive effects on severe patients – within 2 hours of taking the drug. Otherwise the results are much like Hoxcl – except probably 50% faster.
But hoxcl is readily available throughout the world, easy to make and cheap.
Remedsivir is almost certainly expensive and likely not available in enormous quantities.
The long term use claims are stupid.
No one is going to suffer any of the long term use side effects from a 5-10 day regime used to fight Covid19. Retinopathy is a rare side effect after months of use.
Further the does for propholactic – long term use is incredibly low. I beleive it is 400mg per month. That is the dose for malaria prevention.
hoxcl is also used against Lupus – and the fact that noone in China suffering from lupus got covid19 is one of the reasons that the Chinese tried hoxcl. It is also used for some forms of arthitis. I beleive those doses are more frequent. but again there is massive amounts of really long term experience and the side effects are VERY RARE.
The MSM claims of shortages are the same is the stuff about hand sanitizer – people panic and clear out readily available supplies. But this is not a difficult to make or expensive drug.
It is so cheap and easily made it is used as pool cleaner. No people probably should not be taking pool cleaner, but supply problems will get worked out quickly.
Well Remdesivir has been in test and was used in “compassionate use” when no other options except death were viable. Now as of March 28th, Gilead is no longer supplyiing that to any provider other than government approved clinical trial hospitals.
So like all other big government supporters, those controlling these drugs are playing god.
I think there needs to be a ” Last Person Memorial” in Washington D.C. honoring the last man/woman to die in government wars, last person to die due to government blocking use of drugs under a compassionate use basis, and anyone dying due to government interference in personal decisions, medical or otherwise.
If there is a 99% chance you will die without a drug not approved or a 20% chance you will live taking the drug, but there might be side affects, even serious, I would want the second option to address the side effects later. I just dont understand those choosing death or supporting death unless they are suicidal.
But again, that more of a Libertarian thinking.
Or individuals should be free to make their own choices.
If you want to consult “experts” such as doctors – you are free to do so. I certainly will.
But absent direct harm to others my choices are ultimately my own.
They are not your business, or governments.
Not enough people think like we do. Too many wanting control over lives.
You are much more libertarian in your thinking about business and business will never do anything to harm customers. I am not that far. But once something has been introduced and someone is on deaths door, using something unapproved should be an option with one stipulation. The company providing the drug can not be held responsible for any adverse affects.
Your decision, your consequences.
You keep asserting I do not beleive businesses will ever do anything wrong.
That is false.
Businesses are made of humans and humans make mistakes – sometimes with malice.
I have no problem with laws. But legitimate laws punish acts AFTER actual harm has occured. If there is no harm – there is no justification for the use of force AKA government.
Government can say “if you kill people, you will spend decades in jail”.
You are free to do as you please. Government can send you to jail when they prove you have murdered someone.
We already have criminal law, contract law, tort law.
Those cover all possible harms you can do to another.
Any regulation – a priori constraint is either redundant or in error.
Of course using something unapproved should be an option.
There should be no requirement for government to approve.
I think the vast majority of people are libertarian with respect to themselves.
Especially when they are the ones having to decide to close their business, lay off employees, or take risky drugs when facing potentially terminal illness.
Unfortunately the same people seem to believe that their opinion regarding the same decisions when they apply to OTHERS should have the force of law.
The racial question is relevant. I do not know that there is a racial profile to Covid19.
There are plenty of diseases and drugs that do not work the same accross different races.
We do know that women are much less likely to get the severe versions of Covid19,
Estrogen is suspected as a mitigator.
We shuould try to learn these things.
We also know that certain genetic traits make this worse and others make it better.
There is also a class of drugs that does nothing to the virus at all, but there are strong indications that it mitigates the cytokine storms in the severe patients.
Pretty good article on china.
I think that the article seriously underestimates the blowback against China of Covid19.
Part of that is that Covid19 is just a trojan horse that allows myriads of people and governments across the world to re-assess their relationship with China.
This has been coming for a long time. US foreign policy has been shifting from Russia focused to Chinese focused for decades. Buried in the “Deep State” opposition to Trump is
a last ditch stand against the loss of political power and influence by the “Russia” crowd in Foreign policy. The shift of focus to Asia was inevitable regardless of Trump. But Clinton took her greatest weakness, and converted it to an asset by taking advantage of the intragovernmental power struggle over the decline in significance of Russia and Trump’s quite open shift to China.
Trump’s trade war with China, the assorted human rights violations the reversal of Xi towards a more Mao like authoritarian regime, and the conflict with Hong Kong as well as the fact that China is over extended and economically far more fragile than in a long time, all are likely to quietly or less quietly drive a move of production from China. My expectation is this will advantage other asian countries – vietnam, Thailand, Malasia, the Philipines. And have less of a domestic impact.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-04-03/chinas-coming-upheaval
OK is tis another paywall site. I went through the ‘Register for free” and it signed me up, and took me back to the article which provided 2 paragraghs, then said “you have read all your free articles”
What’s up?
I did not register. I just went there. I read the entire article. It is very long and thorough.
I do not pay for any of these paywall sites. So if I link to an article it must be available for free.
This morning I turned on the local news to get the weather report since it had been raining early on. The first 5-7 minutes on TV was a story being reported about covid-19 testing, Trump administration problems getting the test kits, how the reagents are the part of the process that is taking time getting enough of that supply, etc, etc. Then I read an article in the paper concerning the same issue, how the states want the federal government ordering those supplies, taking control of the supply chain, increasing the numbers etc,etc.
In both presentations, the “Trump administration” was the one being blamed.
But when is the American public going to get their heads out of their asses and understand the federal government is like the USS Kennedy Aircraft carrier trying to turn around and head the other direction.
Biden could be elected in November, take office in January, order every agency in the government to do a “stress test”, make recommendations that would cut response time to any crisis or need by 25% without increasing staff (just about the same as the test kits fiasco) and he could be reelected in 2024 and this process and all improvements might be completed before he left office in 2028.
The federal government is not like a ski boat that can turn on a dime. You dont say “do this” and have years of red tape and incompetence removed in a few days, a few months or even a few years. From the time the president sends a directive down the chain of command, it can take months before the lifers in civil service begin making changes.
First they receive the order. Once they get the order they have to analyze the current procedures to complete the current process. After that, they have to change the procedures and write new guidelines for all of their employees. Once those guidelines are written, they then go through a myriad of supervisory levels getting approvals, inputs and suggestions. They are then revised and the review process is repeated and then the new procedures are tested. Once proven effective they are put into place. Now the employee training takes place to start the change in the way things are done. Then and only then will the “ship” begin its turn in another direction (process) and head to a different outcome.
It Boeing, much smaller in corporate red tape than the government, can not update and replace software in its new jumbo jets and get them flying before 18 months (and they are still not approved to fly), how does anyone think the federal government is going to change processes to obtain enough test kits to meet NIH’s recommended procedures? And how can the government create processes in private companies to make sure the quantities off the reagents needed to do testing is available.
If this crisis does not wake people up about the federal governments inability to functions quickly, I doubt nothing ever will.
What I fear is the opposite will happen. More people believing the answer is more government, not government being the problem.
I know of know sane reason that a reagent should be part of a test kit.
You want samples – qtips will work. Then you want a sterile means of sending them to a lab,
and probably you want UV protection – so an opaque container.
Reagents will be used in labs. But different tests are likely to use different reagants, and exposing the samples to one reagant when taking the sample probably limits you to using a specific test, and there are multiple different tests today.
I am hard pressed to think of any reagant that can not have its supply ramped up quickly.
I strongly suspect there are other things going on here.
Federalism actually dictates the responsibility for all of this falls with the states.
But many states are in bad financial straights before this, and this is pillaging state budgets.
Govenor’s like Whitmer want total control, and they want to bash Trump,
But they do not want to have to pay for anything.
Further no state can do what the federal government does and just print money.
Addressing why that is a bad idea is a huge topic. But it is a trivially available option to the federal government and not states.
Reason( not common sense for you) tells one that if tests failed and they were getting false positives, then there was something wrong with the test. And if the tests kits
were cotton on the end of a long stick like a Qtip and they were not leaving cotton in the nose or breaking sticks, then something after the swab was failing. That means failure of the container housing the swab, something used to remove the sample from the cotton, something getting the sample into the kit or the machine processing the sample.
So according to multiple articles I read, the reagents are new, specialized and even returned false positives when introduced to sterile solutions. That meant thousands of kits ( the items with the reagents where multiple samples were introduced for processing in the lab clinical machine) could not be used, the company producing the reagent had to identify why it failed and fix that and then replace the thousands that had to be descarded.
So you can do your own research, but that is what I found.
“Reason tells one that if tests failed and they were getting false positives, then there was something wrong with the test”
Nope, even inside of science nothing is absolute everything is probabilistic.
All tests have false positives and false negatives.
The question is the extent of those, or more accurately how precise is the test – what is the error rate. There is no such thing as a zero error rate. What is the error rate that is acceptable.
I am not arguing there was no reagent issue – I do not know.
I was just arguing that a test kit does not require a reagent and that if one is used that will convert a test kit from being generic to being specific to one particular test.
All I know is after they took samples using the first test, they had to use a reagent specific for that test. The sample was introduced to the reagent, something like 20 different test were enclosed in a cassette that was then inserted into the lab processor.
The chemicals creating what they refer to as a reagent was the problem and not until that was fixed could more tests be completed.
Here again, failures at CDC led to this problem. How many failures equal a termination?
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Contamination-at-CDC-lab-delayed-rollout-of-15210075.php?ipid=newsrecirc
Part of the problem – even with our discussion is that you are presuming a top down approach to testing.
Most countries – including the US either did that initially or tried to.
That has a limited window for success. While it does not require top to bottom perfection in decision making, there are lots of “all eggs in one basket” issues.
In the real world. China developed their own test. WHO developed their own test, many nations developed their own test or chose China’s test or WHO’s test or that of another country.
In the US the CDC developed their own test – and they botched that (several times)
Just to be clear the Chinese and WHO tests have their own flaws – there was good reason for the CDC to want to do better.
In the US the real testing problem did not “mostly” go away until Trump essentially pushed CDC to let go of testing, and let private labs and the states work this out.
That resulted in myriads of different labs coming up with their own ways to test.
Some used the Chinese test, some the WHO, many developed their own.
We are already aware that South Korea managed to do drive through 15 minute tests.
US companies have developed in home tests. Just read the news there are numerous obviously unique forms of Covid19 testing that are competing.
These each come with their own advantages and disadvantages.
In 18months the entire world will likely have figured out exactly what the best test is, and most governments will have standardized on that. Though we will still see inovation in private testing – so long as people remain interested in it.
Bottom up arrangements (free markets) make more mistakes that top down solutions. But those mistakes are far less consequential and possibly more important they are corrected rapidly.
I am sure that Musk and his team made many mistakes in their rapid development of a Ventalator from car parts. But no one pays attention to the mistakes – because they have gotten to an excellent working solution rapidly.
Returning to testing.
It should be clear that there is not one universally accepted set of criteria for a Covid19 test.
Toward the begining – when CDC was dealing with a very small infected population and seeking to contain this at the borders, the expectations would have been different than now.
False negative would be a serious flaw, false positives not so much. speed and cost would not be so important – so long as the numbers being tested were small. However having a minimally capable working test right away was critical – and that is what CDC botched.
The criteria for testing millions of people is quite different, the speed of the test, the ease of the test, and the cost of the test are important.
Right now we could deal with a several day delay if that resulted in a cheaper, faster more reliable test.
Back in February they needed a basically working test with a low probability fo a false negative ASAP. They should have used the WHO or Chinese test until they had something better.
Again a test kit that does nto use a reagent at the time the sample is taken can be used by any test by any vendor.
Once a reagent is introduced only tests that reagent does not interfere with are possible.
Biden is not getting elected, and in the unlikely event he is, He is going to be a caretaker.
His presidency will be managed by underlings. Anyone who has not figured out that Biden is not up to this is blind. I would not be happy with underlings controlling the president. But that substantially limits the ability to exercise power.
You are correct that the federal government is sluggish – and states are only a little better.
AND THAT IS HOW IT SHOULD BE.
We do not want the people with power and guns to be able to act rapidly without lots of forethought.
“You are correct that the federal government is sluggish – and states are only a little better.
AND THAT IS HOW IT SHOULD BE.”
So you are fine with people dying due to FDA regulations. You’re fine with government telling providers who could or could not get tested.
I am not!
I am not fine with the existance of the FDA.
Government is not there to solve problems that do not require force.
When force is required inefficiency is the cost to avoid tyranny.
I watched a review by an austrailian nurse of the Musk/Tesla ventalator.
He was very impressed. With a few tweaks it would be superior to most existing high end hospital units. Yet, musk and his people made it from 75% car parts and had a full featured working design with battery backup in a few weeks.
Government can not do this.
I would think the longest part of design was the case and where controls were located for ease of use. All the internal regulators are already part of car computers regulating fuel/air mixtures and the fuel injection systems.
Has it geen approved for use in USA?
So how well is Sweden doing ?
https://reason.com/2020/04/17/in-sweden-will-voluntary-self-isolation-work-better-than-state-enforced-lockdowns-in-the-long-run/
Would be interesting to see a study of the differences between Swedish youth and American youth, up to the age of about 30. But the teens into the mid twenties mainly.
From what I have read, the Swedish young generation are more mature than the American counterparts. When looking at Jacksonville beach (or somewhere close) that just reopened, would the Swedish youth be running to the beach and ignoring the separation requirements like the picture on TV of that beach.
Seems to me that the article supports a more rules oriented society.
Yes, I would like to see the comparison.
At the same time, the problems of “american youth” are the responsibility of their parents.
There has been a substantial amount of research on this.
We know that the very real spike in peanut allergies occured because infants were increasingly protected from not just nuts, but “dirt” of all forms.
We know that similar process produced today’s “snowflake” young adults.
When kids grow up with adults arround ALWAYS. Where conflict is not allowed, and where if it occurs an adult always steps in and resolves it, those kids never develop the skills necescary to resolve conflicts with others.
We have trigger warnings and safe spaces for young adults today – because growing up they were protected from all unpleasantness by adults and now as young adults themselves they expect this to continue.
Our parenting and our schools produce young adults of exactly the kind we see today.
I would further note that these problems are NOT universal. These problems are worst among affluent and upper middle class kids. Minority and working class kids get crappy schools, but not so ideologically warped. They are more likely to get parents that left them alone and expected them to fend for themselves. Rural parents and many suburban parents also produce more kids who are more independently capable and less ideologically broken as adults.
Put simply an awful lot of what so bitterly divides the country today is broken education and parenting.
We have probably read some of the same things. It has been noted that Swedish parents give their kids much more leeway while growing up, but at the same time know much more about what their kids do than the American counterparts.
Could be that is why Swedish youth and younger generations are more socially aware of their actions and not so self centered.
I consider diversity to be an important value – but it does not come for free.
One of the many flaws of left ideology is that they concurrently value diversity and conformity.
Those are not compatible.
We are really dealing with a Ying/Yang – Chaos vs. Order. An issue that we deal with constantly.
Optimal society balances chaos and order.
As Reagan wrote
“Up to man’s age-old dream – the maximum of individual freedom consistent with law and order”
The objective is freedom. But total freedom is chaos and is failure. We want the most freedom possible – Order is NOT the goal. But SOME order is a requirement for freedom.
I do not oppose fundimental law – criminal, contract and tort law. While I reserve the right to challenge specific current provisions of criminal, contract or tort law. I support them completely as a construct.
But regulation is not criminal, contract or tort law, it is redundant with, often contradictory with justifiable laws. And most importantly it disrupts the balance between order and freedom.
Our education system has always had flaws, but there are some very specific ways the US has driven our education system towards failure in the past 40 years, and the consequences are evident in young adults today.
The Swedes have not made all the same mistakes. Further they have different problems of their own.
I do not consider the higher degree of conformity in sweden and other more monocultural societies to be net positive.
That does NOT mean that it has no benefits. I strongly suspect the swedes are more voluntarily compliant with good advice for dealing with Covid19. But that some compliance does not always manifest itself positively.
And much of my problems with many modern young adults is that they are sheepishly compliant. More so that Swedes.
A significant part of the political divide at the moment is that way too many of us want to be sweden – not the real sweden, but a mythical one of their own imagining.
While a similarly large portion of us most definitely does not want to be either the real sweden or the imaginary one.
This gap is one of core values, and it is not bridgeable, and not compromiseable.
Specifically related to differences between swedish young adults and americans,
There are myriads of factors driving differences.
Very few countries have the breadth of diversity the US has.
Myriads of things become radically different based on the degree of diversity.
We are having a debate about Tribalism today.
But Humans are inherently “tribal”.
Blood is thicker than water. In prior era’s Clan – family in the croader sense was critical, then community, then nation, then race.
Put simply ALL OF US are innately more trusting and more bonded to those we are physically closer to (mostly).
In Sweden most everyone is the same race, religion, …..
The social pressures for conformity are orders of magnitude stronger.
Europe – including Sweden has been facing a massive inrush of immigrants – at least partly out of necessity as lower birth rates create a shortage of people – particularly at the bottom.
This is stressing European countries in ways they have not seen before.
Eurpoeans are finding themselves behave in the same “racist” ways that americans did generations ago.
Regardless, it is innate that we have far higher degrees of trust of those who are closer to us.
We also have higher degrees of charity toward those more similar to us.
When I adopted my daughter from China it entirely reshaped my view of the world.
Not in an intellectual sense. But in the sense that my “tribe” changed.
Most of us care far more about the homeless, the poor, in our country than elsewhere in the world.
All I am saying – is again we both trust and care more about what is more familiar to us.
Suddenly, this 2 year old child who was malnourished and by american terms severely deprived became part of my immediate family – my daughter.
I had to stop watching late night TV because “save the children” commercials were emotionally gutting me. Suddenly the children in those commercials were my daughter. They were now connected to me, close to me in a way that they had never been before.
The point I am trying to make is that the degree of actual diversity in a society have consequences that we are often completely unaware of.
I would expect that any highly monolithic homogenous society will have much greater conformity.
Sometimes – as in Sweden and social distancing that has positive results,
other times as in Iran with people licking relics the consequences are negative.
Regardless conformity is far higher the more homogenous society is.
I would further note that there are substantial benefits to diversity. But conforming to societal expectations absent law is not one of those.
A major facet of “american exceptionalism”, is the innovation, creativity, that diversity and the reduced force of conformity allow. This is a major part of why we can take in immigrants from other nations and have them become far more successful than in their own country.
American exceptionalism is not racial. or genetic, it is a consequence of the degree of freedom and diversity in this country.
And the conformity of Europeans is a result of the small “states” that exist in Europe. One might compare Sweden and its differences with Spain to New York and its differences with Texas.
Both NY and TX each by themselves have greater internal diversity than if you merged Sweden and Spain.
The diversity in the US exists because of and requires a great deal of individual liberty.
The consequences of that symbiotic relationship between diversity and freedom is “american exceptionalism”
I want to be careful here – because Sweden specifically (and the nordic nations more broadly) have a long tradition of economic liberty – going back to the 18th century. One that evolved similarly but almost independently of the rest of the west.
But they DO NOT have the Anglo traditions of diversity. about 2 decades ago Sweden was 98% homogeous. Today they are an order of magnitude less diverse than the US. Further they are having massive problems with that new diversity. While the swedes claim to respect diversity on an intellectual plane. They have for centuries not had to deal with any of the problems and costs of diversity and they are having a hard time with those today.
Conversely the modern left is trying to force on the country swedish levels of conformity, while failing to grasp the fundimental conflict that has with diversity which they also claim to prize.
We appear to be getting a serious lesson in exactly what is wrong with the socalled “precautionary principle” that is the core of much of progressivism today.
The precautionary principle argues that even if the odds of some catastrophic disaster are low we should still act to thwart it because the cost if it happened would be monumental.
What the precaustionary principle ignores is that acting to thwart a low probability hypothetical has a cost too – frequently a high cost, sometimes a higher cost than the disaster we seek to avert.
No economic analysis of Global Warming produces a result that favors reducing CO2 without using highly unusual discount rates for the future value of present money.
What does this mean ? As a rule of thumb an investment today to reduce future costs does not make economic sense unless the amount saved over 7 years exceeds the required investment.
Now we are seeing a different version of the failure of the precautionary principle with Covid19.
The draconian steps that government has taking to thwart Covid19 are only reasonable if the cost of failing to do them is far higher.
The larger the portion of the population that has already been infected the less reasonable and the less effective the measures we have taken to thwart Covid19 are.
The Santa Clara study is suggesting that we are undercounting the number of infections by 2 orders of magnitude.
If that is true that means several things:
Most if not all of our efforts to contain Covid19 have done little or nothing.
That bears repeating multiple times.
Covid19 is much less deadly than we have been told.
The vast majority of people infected show either no symptoms or very few.
Potentially more than 60M people in the US have already been infected by Covid19 – that would be very similar to the high number that are infected by the flu each year.
This is “burning out” not because we have defeated it, but because it has gone about as far as it can go. As I have noted repeatedly it is very rare that more than 25% of a population are infected by ANYTHING.
That not only is what we have done ineffective, but it is the WRONG thing.
That we should have focused on protecting the most vulnerable – which is a pretty clearly identifiable group. Rather than the general population.
Personally i think that an infection rate 2 orders of magnitude higher than we have assumed is unlikely. But a rate one order of magnitude higher is increasingly likely.
And most of the conclusions I listed for a rate 2 orders of magnitude higher are also true of one order of magnitude higher.
Doesn’t DeBlasio realize he is channeling Mao ?
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/18/de-blasio-wants-new-yorkers-to-rat-on-neighbors-dont-do-it/
People are fine with this.
Germany had over 150,000 informants that were Nazi supporters that would “rat” on neighbors. Germans did not care or rebel. When they did care it was too late.
Why should a few of use Libertarians worry when the majority is not paying attention living in their own little caccoon?
Some people are fine with this. Many are not.
Right now we are at the early end of a revolt against this.
Many of the “revolutionaries” are near the fringes.
But barring an unlikely spike in Covid19 deaths, with each passing day more and more people who are not so fringe are going to join the assorted protestors.
Trump Concubine Spins Covid Testing Playing Politics With Data:
4 million tests for 330 million people? That’s only 1.2% of our population. Of the top five countries with the highest cases of COVID-19, we rank second to last in testing per capita.
Reminder: Trump’s prescient new Sweetie said this on Fox News in Feb:
“We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here, we will not see terrorism come here, and isn’t that refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama?”
So did Fauci, So did Pelosi, So did others in leadership.
I already shared many links that you made some comment questioning my thinking in doing so
Jay has no interest in the actual facts.
Rather than using private derogatory pet names. Can you give people the minimal respect they deserve and refer to them by their actual name.
No one here calls you rude names despite the fact that you have been pretty much wrong by the numbers from day one.
I doubt you have been paying attention, but we have now learned that the FBI had assesses Steele in 2015 – Before the Steele Dossier, and determined that it was more likely than not that he was being feed russian disinformation.
There was no reason for that assessment to have changed. There was discussion about the probability that the information being fed to Steele about Trump was deliberate Putin Sourced disinformation.
That assessment now seems increasingly likely. And more important that information was NOT provided the FISA court.
So there is a very high probability that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election – AGAINST TRUMP AND FAVORING CLINTON.
So what is it that you have been right about the past 3 years ?
Why would someone who should be hanging their head in shame for slandering others still be engaged in that same slander ?
Read Dave and my comment thread about testing.
Yes CDC screwed up. No argument there. Lifers in government incompetence.
So given your thoughts on this issue, you are representative of those believing in government taking the lead in most everything. So provide some insight.
1.Do you believe those working at CDC creating the testing procedures, developing a system that provided false data were responsible for the failure that delayed testing for weeks?
2. Do you believe the CDC and FDA regulations delaying private labs from using their own tests delayed testing for weeks?
3. Do you believe Trump had any direct input into the development of faulty test system from CDC?
4. What changes, if any, would you have made to eliminate a faulty test system?
And please avoid the “Trump lies” talking points. I know that, but that does not bother me. I have known shown since 1968 that politicians lie. Those lies cost 50,000+ american lives along with lies 43 used to prosecute “finishing daddy’s” war that cost thousands more. Anyone that does not know politicians lie to get into office, lie to stay in office and lie to maintain policy support have their head up their asses.
All the early tests were unreliable. The issue with the CDC is that they choose to develoop their own at a time when it was critical to have something ASAP, and they failed 3 times.
Separately from that they prohibited any other labs from doing Covid19 testing.
University’s were capable of putting a swab under an electron microscope and looking for the actual virus. That is a time consuming and inefficient way to test, but it is highly accurate and For a couple of thousand tests it is acceptable.
The government should NEVER EVER stop third parties from doing something that does not involve harm.
I doubt Trump gave a shit about CDC/NIH/FDA until 2020.
Regardless, mistakes were made, and he or people appointed by him are responsible.
None of those mistakes were unusual. Obama made the same mistakes.
That said, Trump was elected promising to do better. In this area he did not.
Changes ?
Eliminate FDA. Eliminate government drug regulation – whether narcotics or perscriptions – wipe it all out.
Merge CDC and NIH and eliminate all other responsibilities except border related health testing, and stopping epidemics at the border.
Everything else is the responsibility of the state.
At the state level – the states have the power to make recomendations.
They do not have the power to use force outside of:
Quarantining people who are actually sick and contageous.
Isolating the most vulnerable portions of the population from the rest of us.
There is no government power to abridge the rights of healthy people.
When you have counted to 4,000,000 You can complain.
That would require every employee of the federal government to perform one test.
Regardless CDC/NIH are responsible for testing people crossing our borders.
Testing inside the border is the responsibility of each state.
You made the big rant that Trump did not understand the limits of his authority.
Now you are botching it.
CDC improperly interfered with state (and private) testing early on – I will completely give you that.
Separately I strongly suspect your claim is wrong – please provide as source.
The US has done almost half of all the testing in the world.
To match the US Italy, Spain, Germany and France would have to have done about 1.3M tests between them. I doubt it.
Last, we are honestly past the point at which testing for infection matters much.
If a patient shows up at an ER with the symptoms they are going to get treated for Covid19.
What we now need to do more of is Antibody testing. That is a completely different kind of testing.
What we need to know is the true infection rate for the disease.
It is pretty well established at this point that we are undercounting infections world wide by atleast a factor of 2. It is likely that we are undercounting them by a factor of 10, It is possible we are undercounting them by nearly a factor of 100.
If there are 70M people in the US with Covid19 antibodies we have just waster several trillion dollars to fight something that is less consequential than the flu.
Further, the larger the denominator is the less likely it is that all these measures we have taken had any effect.
And finally the larger the denominator is the more certain we can be that if there is a fall resurgence it will be small.
Even if the number of infected is only 7M the same thing are probably true.
Figures don’t lie, but liars can figure. So one can look at any data, calculate a number and then present that number as fact. Its just the way its interpreted.
So there is one very good website that provides good analytical data. Not some tweet from some twit on twitter.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-tests-cases-scatter-with-comparisons
Please note that in this graph it presents each country’s test data per million population compared to confirmed cases per million population. Only Italy, Switzerland, Luxumberg and Iceland exceed the United States in Test per million population and test per confirmed case per million.
And there is other data that would need to be analyzed such as population for each country and how total population might impact the need for testing ,etc. Who made the testing system for each country? Private of government? Did they have problems with their tests like our CDC developed tests?
Interesting site.
I further noted that there is the ability to look backwards in time.
From what I can see the US Tests/M versus Cases/M was comensurate or better than other developed countries from Jan. 21, 2020 forward.
The relevant criteria right now is antibody testing.
We are well past the point where infection testing is meaningful.
Probably 68M people got the Flu in the US last year.
We did 247,000 tests for the flu.
Testing for the disease only matters if you still beleive you can contain it, and you are looking to identify asymptomatic people to quarantine.
We lost containment weeks ago.
At this time if you are sick WITH ANYTHING, you should self quarantine.
No test necescary – PERIOD.
I had a long discussion with Ron about testing early on.
I argued that testing had nothing to do with containment (or treatment).
I was wrong. You can use testing as a tool for containment with a small enough population if you can act while the portion of the population infected is still very small and it is reasonable to assume it is localized.
But testing has very little utility if you are trying to stop this at the borders. You must quarantine by default anyone who came from the infected region, and anyone who they have come in contact with. You do not need testing for that.
Testing has no utility at all once this is into the GP.
Even Piers Morgan has awoken:
Science does amazing things, medical science being a prime example. We have made tremendous progress in treating cancer, it has not yet nearly completely triumphed and we have been on the right track since Watson and crick found the structure of and worked out the dna–rna–protein paradigm. That was mid 50s. Nearly 70 years later we are perhaps halfway there on treating all cancers.
Treating a virus has been an elusive goal. It’s not alive so you can’t kill it. Only the body can eliminate it, if it lives long enough. And somevirusesare never eliminated, herpes, aids for example.
Aids led to a giant leap forward on our understanding of the immune system and today aids can be repressed but not eliminated. If the drugs suddenly were not available aids patients would be back in the same boat.
I believe that covid will lead to a great leap forward in virology, but on the same time scale as aids research remade immunology. Decades. It’s nice that there is already one truly promising treatment drug remdesivir. That is due to the fact that private and publically funded research has already long been working on virology and immunology. The private research, by drug companies is built on a mountain of public research, University research funded by government grants. We need both and both deserve the credit.
Roby, very good comment. I agree 100%, especially with your last two sentences because there is a need for what each sector does best.
But on the other hand, when one screws up, everyone giving the accolades should be willing to criticize when things go wrong.
Politics should remain on the sideline in both instances.
That is the problem today. Both sides quick to praise, but doublely quick to defend no matter how bad the outcome.
No one wants to accept responsibility in negative outcomes.
Once upon a time I was an environmental engineer (so called) working for the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, we were in a section that oversaw groundwater studies around landfills and hazardous sites. I did a lot of talking to officials and citizens on the phone as part of it. At some point I discovered that it was very easy to say, I screwed up, to people, simply saying that I made a mistake was much easier than trying to escape from that. My balls did not fall off and no one killed me, in fact it made people more sympathetic and they quickly forgave.
But not when the stakes are high, they just kill you if you are wrong, so who wants to be wrong?
When people fail in many fields at a high level their life is all but over, at least in their field.
I am more forgiving than most, many of these things are complicated, difficult, and its easy to jump on mistakes in hindsight. Humans are fallible. If infallibility is the standard no one can have a responsible job.
Politicians who have a cult following can get away with a lot of shit though, sometimes much, much more than they should. Few politicians have such a cult following but those that do are more dangerous. Bernie is one, trump is another, and the politicians from safe districts or states are immune nearly to repercussions. Like Leahy or Graham could ever have to answer for anything, they have lifetime employment no matter what.
But as far as the “lifers” in the bureaucracy, or scientists they are not safe when they screw up (as humans will) so they are not eager to say when they were wrong.
I knew a very brilliant asian lady who had a golden career at the top of everything and then she made a technical mistake handling AIDS virus and her career was over that day. Her mistake had harmed no one.
Roby, yes, careers are ended by bad decisions. But not everyone is held responsible for bad decisions. Those are the ones I am addressing.
The captain on the Roosevelt made a mistake. Almost immediately he was relieved of command. Held responsible.
CDC created a test kit, did not insure it worked, distributed it, delayed testing for weeks getting another developed, all while. the FDA was blocking private labs from using ones they created.
Was anyone held responsible? Was the media blaming anyone in CDC for the botched test? Who accepted responsibility for the bad test? Who is the media blaming? Anyone with direct involvement in the development?
This is the perfect example of our comments. Due to a project being one that would probably not provide a profit, gov’t provides grants to companies to create tests. If they fail, the companies are held responsible. Then they quietly hold individuals responsible in their company.
Please make a list of the things you think that govenrment has done right in this.
To be clear, I am not saying that government has no role at all.
But I think if you make such a list you will quickly have a good idea of the relatively limited role and scope that government has.
Next list all the screwups. I think you will find nearly all of those are government.
Finally list private and govenrment actions that have place OTHERS at risk.
The mega church that wants to bring 5000 parishoners to a crowed easter service in person is stupid as hell, but does not pose a risk to people who do not choose to accept that risk.
While all the actions of govenrment impose one risk or another, on harm or another on people.
Is there a need for govenrment ? Absolutely. I agree with much of the criticism of Trump’s daily cheerleading sessions. At the same time they are critical.
We do not actually need anything from those briefings. At the same time without them we will lose hope or choose to act stupid.
At the same time the things that are actually being done are mostly not being done by government.
I dont need to make lists. I have already said govt screwed up. Ask Jay and Roby to do that.
I have said govt never does anything right short of the military.
What I said is I agreed with Roby that govt’s role should be in grants funding research. Private enterprise should create to final product. GPS was a government project that made its way to commercial use. The internet was another gov’t project ending in commercial setting.
I did not ask you to list government screwups.
You said there was a roll for both and shared credit.
I asked you what has government succeeded at that is deserving of credit ?
There are some things. Regardless, my point was not to continue the attack on Trump or the government. But it was to identify what role government actually plays. What is can do or has done that is effective.
There is little need for sharing.
There is an interview on Youtube and Real Clear Politics by the Swede responsible for the Swedish Covid19 response. He was not a politician, but he was quite interesting.
Je pointed out CORRECTLY, that the measures various governments have taken are for the purpose of protecting the healthcare system. So long as the healthcare system is fully functional the number of total deaths will be the same – regardless of the lockdowns.
For those nations that can cope with a sudden influx of critical Covid19 patients locking things down merely prolongs the economic damage. The same total number of people will get infected, the same total number of people will die. But they will do so over a significantly longer time period. Avoiding overwhelming the health care system only make sense – if in fact the disease is going to overwhelm the healthcare system.
Aside from Italy and Spain – which have an aged population and an inadequate health care system, this has not occured in the west. Even NYC which is by far the hardest hit in the US could have continued to function with almost an order of magnitude more cases.
Sweden is running at far below their capacity. Both Sweden and the US have substantially higher than average numbers of ICU beds per capita. Further Both countries have an enormous surge capacity. The official number of ICU beds in US hospitials is less than 1/3 of the actual ICU care capability of those hospitals in a crisis.
Sweden has a slightly higher mortality rate than much of europe and its neighbors. He noted several factors in that. Sweden has significantly larger nursing homes than most of Europe, and Sweden was slow to stop visitors to nursing homes, as a result they had a large number of early deaths in nursing homes. That problem is now resolved. Next Sweden is not lockdown, as a result it will see a higher peak number of infections BUT it will also get through this much faster, and so long as that peak does not overwhelm the healthcare system, that is the best possible outcome. Sweden appears to be past the peak now.
But Sweden faces much easier choices moving forward than lockdown countries.
The government has no orders to rollback or not, There is no reason for the government to worry that if they revoke some order too soon there will be a sudden spike.
In the US and most other countries our leaders are fighting over whether it is “too soon”
Sweden is not. Sweden has no reason to expect a 2nd spike. They have every reason to expect that they are past the peak and the decline will be as rapid as the rise.
All the US governors have to worry that if the roll back parts of the lockdown they will get a 2nd spike.
BTW he noted – as I have said, as most models say and as even the experts say quietly, So long as the healthcare system is able to deal with the serious cases, there is no statistical difference between lockdown and no lockdown in outcome. There will be the same number of total deaths, the same number of total infections. they will just occur more rapidly.
Viruses are quite a bit simpler than Cancer.
It is my understanding that Herpes C can be “cured” in 95% of cases today.
Further though rare there have been several instances of aids “cures”.
Aides is also several orders of magnitude more complex to combat than Covid19.
The preliminary results for Remedsivir are better than those from Hoxcl. But the preliminary results on Hoxcl are still strongly positive. Further Remedsivir is not formally approved for anything. It is in limited supply, it is not likely to be scalable rapidly. Hoxcl is so common it is used as pool cleaner, is FDA approved, any doctor can prescribe it. It is as safe as aspirin.
In otherwords outside of a few people or very stupid doses or protracted high dose use it meets “first do no harm” – Remedsivir BTW does NOT yet meet that criteria.
We know alot about Hoxcl generally. We know very little about Remedsivir generally.
This is the same dilema we face with vaccines right now. There are almost 40 vaccines under development NOW. Almost every single one of them is likely to be effective in atleast some cases. The massive testing of vaccines is only a small part about “do they work” the largest portion is about can we give this to 1B people without killing too many of them.
We know the answer to that with Hoxcl. Hoxcl meets all the criteria for very broad use now.
Remedsivir is unlikely to ever be approved for any use outside of seriously ill patients where the risks of the drug are low compared to the risk of the illness.
I googled hoxcl and got nothing relevant. Links?
hoxcl = HydroxyChloraquine.
There is substantially more evidence that it is effective. None of that evidence meets the FDA gold standards and it will take months before proper controlled studies can meet those standards. It appears to work slower than Remedsivir – though still quite fast.
But there is only one study on Remedsivir so far – there are about half a dozen on HyroxyChloraquine.
Given what I have found out so far If I had serious Covid19 and could ask for anything, I would ask for Remedsivir. But hoxcl can be used faster, without speicial approvals has an enormous supply, is legal for a doctor to perscribe without FDA approval, has a century of experience being used with billons of people so the contra indicators and doses are very well known. None of this is true of Remedsivir and probably never will be.
“None of this is true of Remedsivir and probably never will be.”
Because you say so.
In fact, remidsiver may not pan out; in the end many promising drugs do not for various reasons. I am not going to believe strongly in on it until it has passed some more milestones.
All the same, remidsiver has enough actually promising results to have fueled a stock market rally. Allegedly, respectable brokers do research on companies and their prospects before advising their clients to buy. You know, your beloved market being the test of value. You should be hoping for remidsiver, except that your guys are not promoting it and you have gone all in for the “hoxyl” craze so of course you must instead dismiss remidsiver with no firm grounds, while promoting hoxyl with no firm grounds.
Ideological bullshit science, both the left wing and right wing versions, is a naive tragedy. Let proper studies be conducted and we will see what comes out.
As of today your “Hoxyl” is a mostly a right wing fad. Its misuse has killed more people than its been shown to save. Granted, any drug can be misused, but in this case the misuse was brought on by the hype of Carlson/trump/Fox commentary universe. I would not rule out that it might be helpful to some patients as a part of a mixture of medications, although the evidence is incredibly thin for even that as of today. You allegedly understand statistics, right? So you should understand how shaky the support is for any clear therapeutic effect of hoxyl based on tiny studies of unrepresentative populations. You’d likely be dismissing it if trump were not promoting it and the dems and media doubting and dismissing it. Based on your all in hoxyl promotion I doubt your grasp of statistics is nearly as firm as you have claimed. If you cannot see how little statistically convincing evidence there is for hoxyl then you fail Stats101.
I am glad they are testing hoxyl in actual properly statistically conducted studies and I certainly hope it will help someone somewhere. Since Tucker Carlson and trump have hyped it and the conservative universe has bought the hype, now, for better or worse, it is a thing and it needs to be proven or disproven, tested properly since it can either be put in the tool kit or discarded rationally. We will hopefully know something more statistically grounded in a month or so on both medications. Which does not help very many people immediately but if one or both drugs are actually effective and relatively safe it could be of huge consequence in the longer run.
You wanna open up the economy? You better be praying for some considerable effect of both drugs.
If remidsiver or some follow up structurally related medication (and I would be very surprised if its developers are not even now experimenting with a family of tweakings of its structure) does not pan out and hoxyl proves effective I will admit it. I can say with certainty that there is zero chance that you will do anything other than put up a smokescreen of bullshit if the reverse turns out to be true. May time test my predictions.
Roby, with the debate about these two drugs, political differences are blocking facts about the use of these drugs. According to articles I have read remedsivir was used compassionate use in many hospitals, but now Gilead has limited the use to selected hospitals as part of clinical trials.
So now you or one of your family is in critical condition. Now Hydroxychloroquin is available “off label”, but remedsivir is not unless your in one of the selected hospitals until 12-18 months when the trials and results are analyzed and published.
If the doctor recommends Hydroxy, do you use it or not?
That has been my position all along. Only you or your doc should make “end of life (saving)” decisions. Not the FDA, not Trump, not Fauci , no one else.
And my thinking is if Gilead can produce enough remedsivir for compassionate use, then no red tape should result in one persons death. Clinical studies can be conducted, but so can compassionate use. And if compassionate use is selected, the Gilead should not be held responsible for adverse outcomes legally in criminal or civil actions.
Right now there is not enough information being provided to many for an understanding as to why decisions being made are being made. Is it government or something else?
Gilead has changed the terms of use. But it has not reduced the availability.
They have just shifted to focusing on getting data.
As I understand it, it is easy or easier to get into a study as approved for compasionate use – sort of. Compasionate use was done on a case by case basis. While for studies doctors are given sufficient remedsivir for the some defined number of patients, and the doctors select the patients based on the study criteria.
Though the studies are focused on the most serious cases.
I have no idea what the supply of remedsivir is. but under the best of circumstances it is a tiny fraction of hoxcl.
There are red/blue games going on, trump vs. media. but there are also other games.
there is decades of research on hoxcl – done by the French. hoxcl has a NIH problem in the US. Next it is about as generic as you can get, several companies produce it. No one owns it. There is no multibillion dollar drug company that will benefit, no stock that will skyrocket, no massive pool of happy investors behind hoxcl.
At the same time even if it is only half as effective as remedsivir it is a global game changer.
Further it may give us the means to buy time to get to a vaccine.
I could be wrong but I do not think remedsivir is getting beyond critical patients in the first world. And even that depends on how quickly production can ramp up.
I would further note that at this time remedsivir is given by IV. It is possible that is not a requirement. Hoxcl is a cheap commonly available pill.
Hoxcl does not need any approval by the FDA – even though the FDA has given some kind of limited Covid19 approval to it. It is an already approved low risk drug it can be used off label for any purpose.
There are problems with government.
But the fundimental issues with regard to information is more of a “fog of war” thing.
As well as multiple concurrent channels of information.
If you are paying attention to Brix and Faucci – and some others – it is clear they have information sources much more advanced and well developed than the media.
I am also picking up vlogs from doctors who are reporting on unpublished studies that are not hitting the media. Often doctors are incorporating these into their treatment. They are keeping results. they are telling each other what their oppinion is. But they are not stopping treating patients so they can produce a paper documenting the results.
So an awful lot of the information is either coming from word of mouth, exchanged emails in the medical community, or extremely short published results. I have seen some results that were handwritten on graph paper with little in the way of explanation.
And I have no problem with this. There will be time as this slows down to publish papers and to work out the statistical fine points.
Right now saving lives comes first.
“Because you say so.”
Yes, that is my opinion, it is my projection, prediction.
I can site numerous reasons I believe that to be true, but those are still all only my informed efforts to read the Ouija board.
I will be happy to discuss my reasons, you have provided some of yours.
I have little doubt that Remedsivir has improved the financial fortunes of its maker.
I am not aware that it has fueled a broad market rally. But it could have.
My comparison of Remedsivir to hoxcl is that there is little chance ever – and definitely not in the short run of Remedsivir being something just shy of OTC, which is where hoxcl is .
In most of the world hoxcl is OTC.
There is evidence that both hoxcl and remedsiver are effective against Covid19.
The PROBABILITY is Remedsivir is more effective – though more and broader tests could go either way. there have so far been no true large scale controlled double blind tests of either of these against covid19 – and likely will not be anytime soon. Though there likely will be more tests, more large tests, and more controlled tests.
But hoxcl has been used by billions of people. the odds of your ever getting the broad knowledge of tolerance and side effects that exists with hoxcl is near zero.
Still that is an assertion about future odds. I think it is a good one, but the future will tell.
In the short run – for the duration of the Covid19 epidemic, remedsivir is not approved for anything. It is being used currently under compassionate use guidlines or as part of unapproved drug testing. I may not like the law, but the law prohibits doctors from perscribing it – for any use. They either must get permission for compassionate use or get their patient included in a study. that means it will likely in the short run only be used on very seriously ill patients. Hoxcl can be perscribed by any doctor and used off label for any patient. It can be used propholactically. Further any doctor can with a high degree of confidence know exactly what the risks are for any patient.
It is going to be years – if ever that we know whether remedsivir has disparate impacts based on sex, race, other medications, other health conditions.
We just do not and will not for a long long time know all the parameters of remedsivir.
While I strongly oppose the government making regulations on these things.
That does not mean I oppose the pursuit of that knowledge.
I have zero problems with insurance company imposed building codes as an example.
i think that the testing the FDA requires for every single drug would be wise for drugs that are going to be broadly used. I would not likely take allergy medicine that did not have that kind of testing.
But if I had terminal cancer or a life long seriously debilitating disease I would not be as demanding of testing.
Dave, from Gilead website.
https://www.gilead.com/news-and-press/company-statements/gilead-sciences-statement-on-access-to-remdesivir-outside-of-clinical-trials
Compassionate use was stopped about last week and has not started back.
I do not disagree on “proper studies” – but right now we do not have time for that.
This pandemic is doing an excellent job of making obvious and practical many of the arguments against regulation that I have made in the past that appeared theoretical – though they are not.
If Remedsivir lives up to its promise and we delay widespread use until it meets the FDA required testing – 10’s of thousands of people will ACTUALLY die.
Remedsivir may not live up to that promise. But there are dozens of other possibilities that need tried, and one likely will. Moving fast will kill a few people who would not die otherwise. Moving slow will kill MANY people who would not die otherwise.
This is quite frequently true, but it is blatantly obvious right now.
There are now upwards of 40 vaccines in development. Atleast a dozen are at the stage of 1st human trials. That has never ever ever happened that fast before.
There is only so much we can do to shorten the time to broad use on a healthy population.
But we could rapidly get to the point where the benefits outweighed the risk for smaller at risk populations. Older people are an at risk population – we could easily prioritize testing for older people and have a vaccine available for older people in a few months.
Healthcare workers are an at risk population. Further there are one that understands the risks involved, Further they are a population that is almost exclusively working age adults with very few serious health issues.
Getting a vaccine that is safe for smokers, diabetics, children, pregnant women, old people, people with allergies, …. is incredibly time consuming. And you do not want to give a vaccine to a healthy person and kill them.
Regardless, my point is that government regulation is not agile, it is not flexible – and in fact we do not want it to be. And that means there are tasks govenrment should not perform.
“As of today your “Hoxyl” is a mostly a right wing fad. Its misuse has killed more people than its been shown to save.”
False – “fake news”. I can find videos of doctors who are very critical of the hoxcl studies and results who will still conclude that if they got covid19 they would take hoxcl.
That is NOT a right wing fad.
Thus far a single couple – both democrats has overdosed on an Hoxcl slushy made from pool cleaner that pretty well demonstrates that there are idiots everywhere.
There is also a possibility that the women was deliberately trying to kill her husband.
It is likely that in 100+ years of use Chloroquines have killed fewer people than aspirin.
The claim that hoxcl (which is much safer than Chloroquine) is a dangerous drug is LEFT WING PROPOGANDA. The heart issues with normal doses are very very very rare. And a doctor can do a quick EKG to identify patients that hoxcl is contra indicated. The long term use issues are both well understood and completely inapplicable. As to overdoses – you can kill yourself by overdosing on aspirin, and you can go nuts by overdosing on OTC antacid tablets – tums. There is nothing that you can not overdoes on – including oxygen and water.
hoxcl is safe enough to use propholcatically NOW. That is a huge deal. That means it is known safer than any vaccine we might ever develop.
It is already used propholactically arround the world against malaria.
My wife and I took a hoxcl regime 20 years ago before going to china to adopt our daughter.
People who travel to asia or africa routinely take propholactic hoxcl.
I have no idea if remedsivir will ever prove propholatically useful against anything,
But it would take it a decade to get through testing to meet the requirements for that.
After about 5 times as much testing as remedsivir hoxcl looks promising, but less promising than remedsivir. But hoxcl can be used broadly against the entire population NOW.
that is just not happening with remedsivir.
There is no such thing as “proper testing”
There is better and worse testing.
Faucci Falsely called the information on hoxcl “anecdotal”.
Anecdotal evidence in China is the cause of greater interest.
Doctors in China fairly early on discovered that there were no covid19 patients with Lupus.
That lead them to try to determine what might be different about people with lupus.
One difference was the use of hoxcl to treat lupus.
That is annecdotal evidence.
The next step was actually using hoxcl on patients.
That was done in china and South Korea. In china there was one actual study done, mostly it was just used without formally studying its effects.
That one study was small and poorly setup. But the results were promising.
South Korea used it more broadly and kept records. We are expecting results soon.
We know that SK had an extraordinarily low mortality rate.
A very famous virologist in France replicated the study in China. This is also where Azithromyecin was added. This doctor had been studying the use of chloroquines and antibiotics against various viruses for DECADES, and strong indications that they are effective against some viruses but his studies were funding limited because hoxcl is cheap, as were the antibiotics he was using.
Diddier replicated the Chinese study, again on a small scale. And he then replicated the results again on a much larger scale.
All of these recent studies are in vivo, they are controlled – but badly, they are not random, they are not double blind, and they are not very large scale.
That does not mean they are invalid. large double blind randomized controlled studies are relatively new – in my lifetime. Much of medical science was advanced with results from studies inferior to these.
Am I biased ? Absolutely. Everyone is.
that is one of the reasons why when we have the luxury to do so, we do double blind studies.
You claim to know statistics. There are many many things – like global warming, where double blind and even controlled studies are not possible.
The current results from hoxcl are statiscally more significant by far than those for CAGW,
And they are badly controlled, while CAGW is not controlled at all.
Both are equally subject to bias effects.
So put simply, if you beleive that CAGW is true, and you beleive that hoxcl is a right wing hoax – then you are statistically a hypocrit. The statistics and science for hoxcl are better.
Would I prefer the gold standard ? Certainly.
As to my biases. I found out about hoxcl WEEKS before Trump mentioned it. Before any talking head did. I found out about it when there were early reports that China was using it and it appeared to be working. I found that interesting because effective treatment of viruses is very new.
Do I really want hoxcl to be effective ? Shouldn’t everyone ?
Of course I want a drug that billions of people have safely taken that is cheap and readily available to prove effective in fighting covid19.
Covid 19 reducing the infection rate by 50% or the severity rate by 50% or the death rate by 50% would be a “game changer” and there is good evidence that all or most of those are possible. Hoxcl being 50% effective in any of those scenarios would be far more significant than Remedsivir being 100% effective in reducing deaths in severe cases.
Because it is unlikely we will have enough remedsivir to treat all critical cases quickly.
Hoxcl is available now. Because remedsivir is months to years away from being used in non critical cases or propholactically. Absolutely no new drug is going to be used for either of those any time soon.
Regardless, this is not somehow a constest between “left wing remedsivir” and “right wing hoxcl” – as if somehow the drugs themselves have an ideology.
I hope that BOTH prove effective. I will be happy if one does.
Or anything else that is being tried.
But I am still more interested in hoxcl, because even if it is only half as effective as remedsivir or any other drug in testing, it is still far more useful. Finding it effective would be like discovering that aspirin reduced flu deaths and infections 50%.
Absolutely we should have better studies. In the mean time it appears what we have already is good enough to be using both of these in different cases.
To be clear the biggest deal about hoxcl is the very part that the media has most relentlessly attacked.
It is dirt cheap – 0.04/400mg dose
It is dirt common – there are more than 100 million doses readily available now.
It is so common and cheap it is used for pool cleaner.
We could massively increase what is available by purifying pool cleaner
Something an ametuer youtube chemist could do in their garage.
It has been approved for use and taken by billions of people over more than a century.
As I said before it would be like discovering that aspirin reduces flu by 50%.
Even if it is only 20% effective it would be a “game changer”.
What is disturbing is that so many on the left are litterally rooting against it.
Right now the indications are that hoxcl is as effective against covid19 as tamiflu is against the flu. That result has been replicated more than 1/2 dozen times. While each study has flaws – as does the remedsivir study, the odds of all being wrong is small.
Both hoxcl and remedsivir have already proven effective enough that doctors should be using them as appropriate.
I know little of permutations of remedsivir.
But I already know that atleast one biolab is already going through the entire FDA catalog of approved drugs looking for possible treatments and testing them.
The genetic sequencing of the virus and our advances in understanding of genes and protiens allows bio engineers to examine the RNA determine the critical proteins. searh for drugs that effect those proteins and try them.
I fully expect we will have lots of things to try.
But remedsivir has one serious flaw. It is not going to be allowed for treatment of anything but critically ill patients any time soon.
Hoxcl as well as other already approved drugs can be deployed broadly instanting.
The fact that you would choose remidsiver yourself is at least one sign of rationality on your part I will give you that.
But as to your dismissing its likely future usefulness, I say you have poor grounds for that. From the Wiki on remidsiver, the drug was not born yesterday, it already has a history going back to 2013 if I understand correctly, and has an established safety profile, one important milestone. It is a nucleotide analogue, which is quite a broad class. We use one well known nucleotide analogue in large quantities, caffeine. That does not make all nucleotide analogues safe or side effect free, of course.
“Ebola virus
On 9 October 2015, the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) announced preclinical results that remdesivir had blocked the Ebola virus in Rhesus monkeys. Travis Warren, who has been a USAMRIID principal investigator since 2007, said that the “work is a result of the continuing collaboration between USAMRIID and Gilead Sciences”.[30] The “initial screening” of the “Gilead Sciences compound library to find molecules with promising antiviral activity” was performed by scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).[30] As a result of this work, it was recommended that remdesivir “should be further developed as a potential treatment.”[30][2]
Remdesivir was rapidly pushed through clinical trials due to the West African Ebola virus epidemic of 2013–2016, eventually being used in people with the disease. Preliminary results were promising; it was used in the emergency setting during the Kivu Ebola epidemic that started in 2018, along with further clinical trials, until August 2019, when Congolese health officials announced that it was significantly less effective than monoclonal antibody treatments such as mAb114 and REGN-EB3. The trials, however, established its safety profile.[31][32][33][2][34][35][36][37]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remdesivir
Just as I am not “rooting against remedsivir” you should not be rooting against hoxcl.
If this threat remains arround long enough there will be multiple drugs that prove effective.
I would be very happy to learn that you are right and remedsivir is both effective and can be used broadly quickly.
but there are 2 issues with it.
Quinine has been used since 1638. Chloroquine since 1930. less toxic hoxcl since 1945.
Billions of people have taken it. There is just no way in the world that remedsivir’s safety profile will be as well developed in less than several decades.
The 2nd is the FDA. Short of an executive order, the FDA is not going to allow remedsivir to be used outside of critical cases absent completing the full drug approval process which will not happen soon.
If I could get it I would take hoxcl now as a propholactic. That does is 400mg per month after the initial couple of weeks. Would you pay $10 for a 50% greater chance to not get this ?
A 20% chance ? a 10% chance ?
Even if remedsivir has propholactic qualities, that is just not happening.
NYC appears to be giving hoxcl to healthcare workers and first responders propholatically.
And if I contracted something that even resembeled Covid19 and I could get it I would use hoxcl right now. As well as zythromiacin if I could get it.
If I actually got to a critical state I would be begging for remedsivir as there are small indications that is more effective.
But if something better came along – count me in.
All that said, right now we have no vaccine, and will not for a while.
There is no other drug I am aware of with any hope of a propholactic effict.
And small odds of getting one soon or one that is affordable.
Here is work indicating Chloroquine effective against SARS in 2005.
I beleive Diddier’s work using it against other coronavirus goes back to the 80’s.
There have been 2 problems advancing this.
First there is little research money to prove that an existing cheap drug has further unusual uses.
Next, SARS, MERS and other big corona virus threats died before there was preasure to push these studies further
https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-422X-2-69
Here is hoping the US FDA thinks that a safety profile developed in use against ebola in Nigeria has consequence.
To be clear – I am not looking to piss on you. But you and I appear to have entirely different ideas about the FDA. And I think that history validates my pessimistic view.
And here, speaking of market analysis of the prospects of remidsiver and Gilead, is a nice objective well researched article on just that.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/04/20/theres-more-to-gilead-sciences-remdesivir-data-tha.aspx
I wonder when Tucker and trump will start to hype remidsiver and if they do if when the Fox universe and its viewers will discover remidsiver in a big way.
My largest hopes are on this drug.
Weirdly the motley fool is missusing CFR
This is partly because that is the statistic being bandied arround the most.
Also we are inappropriately comparing the CFR of Covid19 with the IFR of the Flu.
The IFR is the deaths in proportion to the estimated infections NOT diagnosed infections.
If random sampling of the population leads us to beleive that 4% or 15% or 30% of us have been infected Covid19’s IFR will be established and it will be far lower than the current CFR – possibly lower than the flu. But the CFR is not likely to change.
Next, both hoxcl and remedsivir are being used primarily against seriously ill patients.
NOT random diagnosed patients. The fatality rate of this group is much higher than the CFR.
Regardless both the remedsivir and hoxcl studies have run the same.
The control group was a similarly severely infected group of patients undergoing moral treatment. Both hoxcl and remedsivir reduced the death rate. Both also reduce the length of the ICU treatment, and the time to testing a 0 viral load.
hoxcl appears to reduce all of the above by 50%.
Remedsivir works even faster – 50% faster than hoxcl.
In one instance a patient went from ventalator to checkout in 24hrs.
Patients with a fever had the fever gone in 2 hours.
Now remedsivir has less than 1/3 the studies of hoxcl at this time.
I would like more and better of both.
But if I was critically ill of covid19 and I was given 3 choices.
remedsivir, hoxcl/z, or nothing.
That would be the order of my choices.
I would gamble based on the less extensive testing that remedsivir was better.
If remedsivir looks promising – why shouldn’t Trump, Tucker, … hype it.
I am pretty sure both have already mentioned it favorably more than once.
But there is a difference between them.
At this time remedsivir appears to be capable of reducing deaths.
While hoxcl has the potential to significantly thwart the infection rate and the severity of those who do get infected.
One more comment. These drugs are unlikely to be tested using the very best statistical methods given the life or death circumstances of their recipients. Double blind studies would not be in the best interests of the patients, the doctor should know what medications their patients are getting. Nor is there likely going to be a population that is given a placebo, that would be immoral and unethical. You could do a double blind and use a placebo with monkeys of course. But no one will be fully convinced by that.
But what can be done is that the trials can be large enough and have clinically relevant populations (such as patients who are very seriously ill) and the outcomes can be compared to the majority of patients in those same clinical conditions who did not receive the drug. Its not optimal but its certainly informative.
“These drugs are unlikely to be tested using the very best statistical methods”
because there is no time.
Further whether they are ever subject to a double blind controlled study or not depends on whether this comes back next fall or next year.
If it does many things will get well tested.
As you note remedsivir has been arround for a while and it was tried against ebola – but again not a double blind study.
There is even an argument – a good one that it is not moral to do a double blind study when people are dying.
“But what can be done is that the trials can be large enough and have clinically relevant populations ”
Have you read any of these studies or the more serious reporting on them ?
There is even plenty on Youtube.
That is exactly what is being done.
The first 3 hoxcl studies had about 100 people – all in the serious or critical catagory.
1 study was done in china, two in France. There is more data available – Both South Korea and China used hoxcl fairly broadly – and I know there are papers coming from South Korea.
I beleive that France is doing a 1000 person study.
NYC is using it propholactically as well as on patients.
The first remedsivir study was 100 critical and severe patients.
It is my understanding they are in the midst of a 1000 person study.
There are many other drugs being tested – I have not seen studies of those but pruprtedly several are promising.
And researchers are working on identifying more and more potential drugs and testing them in vitro before trying them in vivo.
Medicine can not keep up with the 24hr news cycle – but it is moving far faster than ever before.
Ron, I found this on the rate of production of remdesivir and the company’s policies on getting it distributed.
https://www.biospace.com/article/gilead-speeds-manufacture-of-experimental-covid-19-drug-doesn-t-plan-to-charge/
I am not a libertarian so you should not be surprised that I am not a fan of people choosing their own medications willy nilly. I am not opposed to there being some higher say over what a doctor can prescribe either, within reasonable limits. In fact I am in favor of that. Morphine for every ache and pain would be one example of a reason for such control over doctors. I have no problem with drugs being approved for certain applications only. I don’t think most Docs know nearly enough to make good choices if they can just prescribe anything at all for anything at all under the theory of maybe this will work. My father fell the other day, landed in the hospital and overheard two residents talking about COVID. They were certain that all viruses contain RNA (Bzzzt, wrong). No, Docs are not sophisticated as a group about biochemistry.
In Russia, to my shock, many medications are available in drugstores that are prescribed here, most especially antibiotics. Ironic, since they are a very tightly regulated society, but you can diagnose and dose yourself and buy antibiotics and other drugs we regulate. I wonder how they are controlling multi antibiotic resistance issues, I guess they aren’t. They will be sorry, that is a mistake.
Based on what I have read I can’t imagine my doctor recommending oxywhatsis. I would have no enthusiasm for it myself. I would likely ask for remdesivir if I had a serious case. I hope it will be broadly available as quickly as possible and would think that will become a stronger and stronger demand by the day. I can understand the company not wanting to just throw the drug out in a wild west fashion for science and ethical reasons but they ought to get it into hospitals for trials in the hottest places ASAP. I think the news on this will be changing rapidly.
Dave, I’ve read your series of posts, and this time I read all of the words. There was more I agreed with than disagreed with. Little of the part that I disagreed with sounded loony, just we don’t agree, mostly about the partisan politics of hoxyl and its level of promise. But I hope I am wrong in doubting hoxyl, I hope it is effective in some contexts, As well, from my reading there has been much more testing already of remdesivir than hoxyl AGAINST COVID, you say the opposite. I am all for an expedited roll out of remdesivir with normal corners cut if it still seems as promising and relatively safe after data starts of come in from the many trials it is involved in now. I am not sure of how I feel about cutting corners on vaccine development. I don’t have to have an opinion about everything.
I will note that your urgency on providing medications and vaccines does not seem to quite match your frequent rhetoric here that COVID is no worse than the flu. I disagree that COVID is comparable to any US flu in my lifetime. Its more lethal, more contagious according to nearly everything I read. We have 42,000 dead today, and that is just the first wave of this, there may easily be more rounds and they may be MORE deadly than round one if pandemic history is a guide, so 60,000 total US deaths seems very optimistic and that is WITH social distancing. COVID leaves many survivors of serious bouts more damaged than flu even after they are past the crisis of pneumonia, there is serious organ damage. It kills the young and healthy more often than flu does unless I am misinformed.
1). Both hoxcl and remedsivir are reducing the duration of the infection – the time until the viral load reachs zero.
People are dying on both, but at lower rates that the critical and serious populations that are being used to test this.
2). At this time I am aware of 4 published studies of hoxcl and 1 of remedsivir. but in all cases published has to be taken with large grains of salt. The published studies are like 3 pages of notes and charts. They are not peer reviewed, they are all done just to get preliminary results out.
All of the hoxcl studies are consistent. In nearly all cases they reduce the viral load to indectable in 4-5 days (in conjuction with zm). Independently hoxcl and zm take twice as long to reduce the viral load.
I have seen only one remedsivir study and it has all the same problems that the hoxcl studies do, but the results are a viral load of zero in 2-3 days – much faster. Though the death rates are about the same.
There are lots of problems with these studies. There are people removed from the control group, there are people discharged as “cured” but without follow up.
You can find videos on youtube criticising the hoxcl studies. The critiques are valid, and the one remedsivir study I have seen has all the same problems.
The biggest problem these studies have is that treating patients is the #1 priority right now, not getting the study data perfect. If someone is “cured” they are removed from the hospital and often there is no follow up.
There are more and larger studies of both going on.
There is also data from China that we do not have either because China was in a state of chaos and focused on treating people not tracking data or because China is not letting any information at all on Covid19 out now.
I have watched long interviews of key people in South Korea – one hoxcl study was done there. That interview stated that hoxcl was the defacto treatment in SK, and that papers would be forthcoming. But I have only seen one study from south korea.
South korea had a ridiculously low CFR. We do not yet really now why.
A major factor is likely to be SK’s extremely agressive testing.
It is unlikely any country better identified the total number of infected people.
It is possible that SK’s low CFR is a result of accurately identifying the large number of people infected. It is possible that it is low because of the wide spread hoxcl treatment.
It is unlikely we will know for atleast 6 months.
We already know that globally the CFR numbers are probably crap. Because the quality and breadth of testing is so large.
There is also an issue as to how deaths are being recorded. The standard for the Flu and colds is that a person with another health issue that would have killed them withing 6 months gets that listed as the cause of death. And many countries continue to follow that.
While the US is listing all deaths of people who have covid19 as covid19 deaths.
Again this will likely be fixed – in 6-9 months.
We also do not know the actual infection rate yet.
Infection rates are not determined by testing. They are determine by a combination of modeling and random sampling.
The news is constanly comparing the CFR of Covid19 with the IFR of the Flu.
That is an apples to oranges comparison. Only a small number of people are actually tested for the flu. The CFR for the flu would be very high – possibly higher than Covid19.
But the IFR is based on an ESTIMATED/Modeled number of infections of about 60M and a number of deaths specifically from the flu, of people who would not have otherwise died of about 60k.
We do not as of yet know the number of infections. Nearly everyon agrees it is atleast double the number of cases. Atleast 3 random antibody tests came back with about 4% of the population – in the US, Germany and Iceland. But there are newer studies coming back that are claiming an infection rate of 15% of the population – closer to the cruise ships and the naval vesels. The Health minister in Sweden beleives that Covid19 will ultimately infect 50% of people, and that it has probably infected 25% already. And he beleive sweden can handle that and he beleives that the ultimate IFR will be not much worse than the flu.
There is no possiblity that all of this is correct. What you beleive is likely to vary based on whether you are an optomist or pessimist.
I am very closely watching places that have purportedly peaked – including China.
Especially as lockdowns are released. I am also carefully watching sweden.
The swedish health minister beleives Sweden is past midway. He also beleives that because there was no lockdown that Sweden has had a REAL peak and that the numbers are declining because Sweden is growing herd immunity. i.e.that sweden is seeing the normal progression of this virus through a population that is not shutdown and is engaged in voluntary social distancing. Therefore there will be no second wave – atleast not until fall and then it will be a milder wave. He also beleives that nations like the US and Germany and … that locked down their economies are going to see some increases as they slowly roll back the lockdowns. Sweden never closed, so it will not have to reopen – though it still experienced serious economic damage.
Thus far the swedish data appears to be bearing him out.
If we see spikes in countries as they roll back the lockdowns. That is going to give us information about the effectiveness of lockdowns and whether the swedish model is correct.
There are constant claims of a resurgence in China. But aside from a major issue on the China Russia border cause by infected people coming from Russia to China I am not seeing evidence of a resurgence. But it is china and they are going to hide anything as long as they can.
There are really only a few fundimental differences between us on this.
While I am an optimist – I do not trust government.
Further malthusian end of the world scenarios are false – that is self evident – the world is still here so is the human race.
That means that if you draw a probability curve for any event that is promised to be catastrophic that curve will approximate a bell curve PUSHED hard towards minimal negative impact.
That is not a guess. It is rooted in the fact that disasters happen all the time, that small ones are far more common that large ones and that catastrophic ones are incredibly rare.
The last time all life on earth was wiped out was 500m years ago. You can count the number of epidemics that have killed a significant portion of humantiy since 0AD on the fingers of one hand. As Covid19 appears to be going in the US It will be 1/20th as deadly as the spanish flu. that had 600K US deaths for a population less than half we have now.
What that all means is I am more inclined than you to beleive that given a list of possibilities or choices that the results will be good rather than bad.
I have been wrong several times on Covid19. But I have been right more than I have been wrong. and I have been right more than Faucci or Brix or most experts.
Am I a big Trump fan on this ? Nope. The lockdowns were a mistake, the stimulus was a mistake. We should have done exactly what Sweden did. We would have had more cases and more deaths in a shorter period, but we would not have overwhelmed our healthcare system and we would have had the same total number of cases and the same total number of deaths, except we would be nearly out of this now. Further we would not have shutdown the economy – to be clear we were going to have a recession as a result of this no matter what. but it would have been alot less bad.
Summarizing – we are in almost total agreement on the facts – to the extent the facts are known. Alot of them are still speculation, and even that we are not far apart.
But you are more pessimistic than I am.
Even the things I think were huge mistakes – I still think we will get past.
The vast majority of university research is privately funded.
Further government research in almost all areas has a notoriously bad track record at producing results or even advancing basic science.
What is most amazing at this moment is the rise of creative solutions.
There are several biolabs lookinf for Covid19 treatments right now.
There are NOT looking to develop new drugs. They are doing genetic analysis of the Virus RNA and determining which existing approved drugs might combat the virus.
That is a process that will not take a decade.
We are seeing all kinds of efforts to get arround the FDA, CDC, NIH rules and provide needed assistance.
In less than a week a doctor and engineer teemed up with an engineering company to develop and produce an effective machine to clean disposable PPE. They built it into a self contained shipping container and a couple of dozen of these have been delivered to major hospitals. With a few hundred more on the way. They can clean 80000 peices of PPE per day and each can be re-used up to 20 times.
Ordinarily this is a stupid idea. The cost of new PPE is less than the cost to clean it.
There is also a small risk associated with cleaned PPE – either something survived cleaning or the PPE has worn out undetected.
But as a means of dealing with an epidemic surge this is brilliant.
It appears that the ventalator shortage is fizzling – partly because we are running a factor of 5 below ventalator demand predictions, and partly because increasingly it appears ventalators are ineffective in treating Covid19.
At the same time we saw Ford, GM, Tesla, Dyson and other step in and move to produce massive numbers of ventalators in a short time.
And we saw “makers” concoct dozens of makeshift cheap ventalators many of which you could build yourself in your garage.
We heard that China was the worlds exclusive source for most drugs and PPE, and yet 3M is producing masks by the million in the US and now we are fighting over whether to ship US made masks to canada and europe.
And a Bedding manufacturer is getting publicly excoriated for his religious views because he converted his factory to make masks.
The left is batshit crazy. I do not care if someone beleives in the god of flying monkey’s farted out some divine asshole – if they make hundreds of thousands of masks that save lives.
And prager interviewed new yorkers who by 75% margins would rather see more people die than Trump re-elected, is some cases even millions die.
There are myriads of things happening right now.
Name 10 really big things that have atleast 50% government funding ?
Just to be clear – I am not talking abotu 10 really big things government is buying.
The government came up with the funds to buy the PPE cleaners that a team at Bechtel created. But the instant research and development and design program was entirely private.
Government money in research has displaced private money – and usually at substantially reduced effectiveness. There is no actual evidence that government involvment in research, the economy, regulation has EVER produced results that would not have occured otherwise.
In fact in the US right now we have almost the perfect example.
Not only did CDC botch the initial test – twice, but it actively interfered in private testing.
Today 4M americans have been tested – more than 95% by private labs, using privately developed tests.
In the area of testing the free market dispite government interferance saved governments bacon.
The Obama administration used up the entire government strategic reserve of PPE during the H1N1 outbreak. It did not replenish these. Nor did Trump and the US started this crisis without the 100M government reserve of PPE. Yet aside from brief shortages, not only is plenty of PPE available – but there is now enough for ordinary people to get it and wear it daily. And that out of a private mfg system that had all moved to china.
Again Government failed and the free market saved its bacon.
Government has had next to nothing to do with the rappid ramp up in US produced PPE (or toilet paper, or hand sanitizer) or PPE cleaning systems, or ventalators.
You hate Trump – I watch him on TV spewing pleas and barking orders and threats at GM and others, oblivious to the fact that THEY are making things happen. Trump’s pleas, orders, threats have nothing to do with what is actually happening.
I do not hate Trump. But Trump’s daily Covid19 press briefings are just another form of Virus porn. the only useful purpose they serve is reminding us that the sky is not falling.
Neither Trump, nor the governors are actually making things happen. Those things are happening all mostly without government.
We are also seeing in real life most of the economic claims I have made about govenrment and regulation playing out in real time.
It is not possible for Trump or Governors to promulagate rules that are not inherently deeply flawed and will not result in egregiously stupid enforcement.
People were told to “social distance” and to “self quarantine”.
That does not (and should not) mean the same thing to all people. Increasingly the evidence is that my 23yr old daughter in excelent health is in near zero risk.
She can do her job, get coughed on sprayed, … and at worst lose a few days of work.
Though she is doing more, she need to do very little except be careful arround here 60+ parents. Covnersely MY choices are and should be different. I do not need to go out to work or often for any reason at all. I am taking much more serious precautions.
There is no set of regulations that can address that.
There is also no sane reason that people can not walk their dogs, go hunting and fishing buy things that are not absolute necescities,
Everybody from churches to resturaunts to individuals is trying to figure out how to both survive and go about as much of their lives and enjoy life as they can under the circumstances.
Absolutely there are a few idiots out there,
But the damage from stupid government actions dwarfs anything from private idiots.
Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.
Right now it seems like the whole world is insane. Keep buying cheap Chinese S@#+ and expecting reliable goods.
https://nypost.com/2020/04/17/uk-paid-chinese-companies-20m-for-faulty-coronavirus-test-kits/
Diseases change – human nature is constant;
New Covid measurement for auto-gas efficiency:
So now it is near certain that the intelligence community assessment that The Russians tried to help Trump in 2016 is crap and they knew it at the time.
The FBI and CIA had concluded both long before and during the early Trump investigation that Steele was being deliberately fed disinformation about Trump by the Russians.
There is MORE evidence that Putin tried to tilt the election in favor of Clinton than Trump.
There is also more reason to beleive he would want to.
But probaly there is not enough to conclude Putin favored Clinton. But there is far more than enough to conclude the claim that Putin favored Trump was KNOWINGLY false.
That is a BIG DEAL, If the conclusion on knowingly false that also means it is political.
It is deeply wrong to deliberately and eroneously tilt the conclusions of government to favor a political outcome
I would further note that for almost 4 years the Intelligence community has consistently back the ICA and its conclusions. Conclusion we now know were KNOWINGLY WRONG.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/newly-declassified-evidence-casts-doubt-obama-intel
Rep. Crenshaw on Trump.
A perfect response on Bill Maher.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/19/bill_maher_vs_dan_crenshaw_is_the_goal_to_make_trump_look_bad_or_is_the_goal_to_get_to_the_truth.html
I would love to here more about Alito’s position on stare decisis and his worrying about prior cases. If its unconstitutional on one, would it not be unconstitutional on all not unanimous?
https://reason.com/2020/04/20/supreme-court-rules-non-unanimous-jury-verdicts-in-criminal-cases-unconstitutional/?fbclid=IwAR06amB-FU02vbTitRKIhSByjtt7osYhQOZ5bRumRl0Fw7Vg8KK0RY7cyC0
While this is a huge case, and a big win. Directly there are only 2 states it effects – oregon and I think lousiana.
Stare decisis is a rule of legal analysis.
It is NOT a principle – it is NOT immutable.
Scotus is not biblically bound to prior decisions – or we would still have slavery.
But it is uncommon to overrule a prior decision.
Further there are actually instances where any scotus decision must over rule some precident. That was true in Citizens untied – there were atleast 3 prior decisions that could not be reconciled with the facts in CU.
I would further note that this ruling was 6-3 and NOT along ideological lines.
Kagan, Roberts and Alito were on the losing side.
Gorsuch wrote the oppinion, Thomas, Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Breyer and Kavanaugh concured.
Again the point I made went totally over your head.
Alito. Opposing side. Said he was concerned what this would do to other convictions not unanimous.
As a SCOTUS justice, why that position? If its unconstitutional for one, is it not unconstitutional for all?
I can not read alito’s mind.
It has been increasingly common for SCOTUS to limit the retroactivity of its decisions.
There are only 2 states this effects, in one of those it effects 11:1 guilty verdicts, in the other it adds 10:2 guilty verdicts. The number of cases that are impacted is small.
The key constitutional question was “incorporation”.
The 14th amendment arguably imposed the bill of rights on the states. Prior to that the provisions of the bill of rights did not apply to the states.
But the application of the bill of rights to states has been peicemeal.
This adds another peice.
“You wanna open up the economy? You better be praying for some considerable effect of both drugs.”
Sweden did not shut down their economy. they have a healthcare system that is overall slightly inferior to the US in terms of ICU beds and capacity to deal with something like this.
Both the US and Sweden plateaued at about the same time.
Both have plateaued long enough that it is not a fluke we are well past the possibility that the plateau is just a reporting anomally.
Sweden has a very slightly higher death rate per capita. Sweden admitts to having initially been caught unprepared and having Covid19 get into many nursing homes to tragic consequences, Sweden has different elder care demographics to much of the rest of europe which in this particular instance make the elderly in sweden more vulnerable.
Sweden’s only actual measures have been:
a request that people follow the same advice that the CDC has been giving.
A very tight lockdown of nursing homes – no visitors at all.
The same quarantines of people who are actually sick.
Sweden is further north than the US. We now know covid19 is extremely light sensitive – dying very quickly in sunlight. That alone should mean Sweden has a higher fatality rate than the US as sweden still has more wintery weather and far less light than the US.
Taiwan and Japan have not shutdown their economies either.
Taiwan is having the least issues of any country in the world. mostly the consequence of very strict border control and ZERO trust of china.
Japan has 2/3 of the US population, an elderly population, a tokyo metropolitan area with 35M residents that is the most population dense on the planet.
Japan has less cases than Indiana.
At this point there is no evidence that in much of the world this “lockdown” has made any difference at all. That does not mean voluntarily following the general guidlines that would also reduce a flu is not a good idea.
I have also addressed in prior posts the fact that a lockdown serves only a single purpose, reducing the total number of deaths by preventing the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Outside of Wuhan, Spain, and Italy, we have not seen any other nations healthcare system being close to overwhelmed.
Spain and italy have healthcare systems that are not even close to up to this.
Italy in particular has an enormous elderly population as well as a huge percent of people who smoke.
Even in NYC the hardest hit place in the US, we never reached 1/3 of the worst case capacity of the NYC healthcare system.
As long as the healthcare system is not overwhelmed the worst case scenarion from ending the lockdown is that we see a brief spike with 3 times the current number of deaths and infections followed by a rapid decline as we acheive immunity.
The total number of deaths will be the same, they will just occur faster,
The total number of infections will be the same, they will just occur faster.
The more likely effect would be very little change.
Further restoring the economy need not be a all or nothing proposition.
Outside of about 1/2 dozen metro areas there is little to no risk associtated with ending the lockdown.
There is no reason that the entire country must suffer because densely populated regions are still at risk.
As many will die, just slower? I do not agree. Delaying COVID, flattening the curve may very well save more than the medical system from being overwhelmed. If we use the time gained to develop medicines and protocols of treatment that are effective and to catch up on production of the medical supplies that are needed, then flattening the curve may well save many lives, even a huge number of lives.
I do not have the time or inclination to debate which countries have kept this under control. Some countries are being less than honest, some countries may not as yet have seen the worst. I would analyze issues like that when the dust has truly settled. I will say the putin was actually recently publicly admitting that Russia does not have COVID under control to the degree previously claimed and may be in for a bad time. Putin is not a man who easily admits things are going wrong, but his recent comments were of a very concerned man.
https://www.rferl.org/a/all-the-hospitals-are-full-russia-s-health-care-system-scrambles-as-covid-19-cases-rise/30563990.html
In Moscow the news is that all the hospitals are full according to Radio Free Europe. The death toll they are officially releasing does not match such conditions. I have a strong suspicion that the toll is much higher. They don’t die of COVID there, they die of “pneumonia.”
“Now, with confirmed cases exceeding 42,000 and the official death toll from the virus at 361, medical workers across the country are scrambling to keep pace. In Moscow, where over half of the cases have been registered, the health-care system is already being stretched to the limit.
A month ago, President Vladimir Putin insisted his government had “managed to prevent the mass penetration and spread of the illness in Russia.” But on the same day that Belyakov struggled to place his patient, Putin reversed his tone, painting a much bleaker picture of Russia’s battle with the virus.
“We have many problems and nothing to brag about here. And there’s no point in relaxing,” Putin said in a video call with regional governors from his official residence outside Moscow. “We have not passed the peak of this epidemic.”
Russia is further disadvantaged by being geographically north.
There is very strong evidence this does not like heat, sunlight and humidity.
Russia also has an aging and declining population with a disproportionately large number of health problems. And this disease hates old males with health problems.
Though I beleive Russia has a shortage of men – primarily because they have a much shorter life expectancy in russia primarily due to alcohol.
That is also why the results in Sweden are impressive.
Even the experts are in agreement with me on this.
The only measure that actually reduces the infection rate is quarantining the actually sick.
Every single other measure we take reduces the number of new cases per day, at the expense of making this last longer. The area under the curve – the total number of infections is CONSTANT even if you “flatten the curve”
The SOLE purpose for flattening the curve is to “save the healthcare system”.
If the number of critical patients per day exceeds the capacity of the healthcare system then more people will die – not because more are infected, but because the quality of care will decline.
It is likely that happened in Italy and Spain and probably Wuhan.
Italy has a shitty healthcare system and a massive population of people Covid19 likes to kill.
In the US outside of major cities we have not hit 1/10 of the ICU capacity of our heatlhcare.
Inside the cities we might have hit 1/3. We fell FAR short of overwhelming the healthcare system. Further had things gotten substantially worse – we had some measures still available that we did not get to.
The evidence from Sweden is that not doing manditory lockdowns – shelter in place would NOT have resulted in overwhelming our medical system.
That actually coincides with the theory, the models. and what we were told, even what you are saying. You do not get more total deaths unless you overwhelm the healthcare system.
We did not come close.
The 2019-2020 Flu Season resulted in 700K hospitilizations If every single Covid19 patient had to go to the hospital that would be about the same number.
Covid19 has spiked faster than the flu and it will drop faster than the flu – so the Covid19 patients will be in about 1/4 of the time period those with the Flu hit hospitals.
It is likely that Covid19 hospital patients on any given day have not exceeded or barely exceeded flu patients.
We bought very little time – we have already plateaued – far blow capacity.
We are debating possibly treatments but it is unlikely anything will be broadly available – except possibly hoxcl for months and by then this should be down to nothing.
“I do not have the time or inclination to debate which countries have kept this under control. Some countries are being less than honest, some countries may not as yet have seen the worst.”
We are not talking China. I strongly suspect Sweden’s data is better than ours.
Further determining when this has peaked in a country is only marginally effected by data quality. And as several experts have noted – track the number of deaths per day. It is the hardest number to cheat on.
Japan’s healthcare system is with respect to something like this probably better than the US.
It is irrelevant how good Taiwan’s healthcare system is – they stopped this.
Probably because more than anyone else in the world they do not trust the CCP.
Are you claiming that South Korea is lying about their data ?
Regardless – absolutely after this is all over we can sit back from a million miles away and knowing all the things we have to guess about now get everything right.
But we must make choices how to respond based on the data we have NOW.
You can rant about the data and how it will be better later – and that is all true.
But decisions are being made NOW.
You are starting to see lockdown protests. Right now these have a political tinge and are significantly made up of those with more extreme positions.
But every week these are going to grow – possibly exponentially like the virus.
40% of the country is unemployed or on reduced hours. This is NOT rich people.
Food lines are already forming and are large. Worse still the unemployed can do very little but play video games and watch netflix. The can not engage in recreation.
We are at the very early stages but it is likely you have a new VIRUS coming.
One of angry people with nothing to do and no money.
One of the things the minister of health said is that no democracy can lock down its people for long. One of the reasons Sweden opted for keeping things open is to avoid social unrest.
Russia was not an example anyone has used regarding Covid19.
They have crappy healthcare, an unhealthy population and the country is at a higher latitude,
Russia is going to be BAD.
“Sweden is further north than the US. We now know covid19 is extremely light sensitive – dying very quickly in sunlight. ”
That is not what the WHO and CDC are claiming. They state that as of what they know now the sun does Not kill COVID. UV does kill COVID but the sun does not contain sufficient UV at normal elevations to kill COVID.
What has WHO been right about ?
There are actual studies on this.
BTW if UV kills covid19 (it kills all viruses), then this will be worse at more norther latitutudes and it will be better as we head into summer.
Sunlight means UV light.
View at Medium.com
https://www.dailywire.com/news/sunlight-destroys-coronavirus-quickly-on-surfaces-unpublished-government-study-finds
https://news.yahoo.com/sunlight-destroys-coronavirus-very-quickly-new-government-tests-find-but-experts-say-pandemic-could-still-last-through-summer-200745675.html
UV radiation from the Sun is increasing dramatically right now. While it seems to be higher than normal rapid increases are normal in the spring.
Yes UV lamps are more intense than Sunlight. But the UV energy levels that a hospital uses to disinfect and kill viruses – including Covid19 can be reached outside they just take longer.
But guess what The sun is out all day, and the days are longer and the sun’s angle is higher so there is less atmosphere to penetrate so there is a large increase in UV going on now.
And interestingly Covid19 is plateauing across most of the world.
If WHO are claiming that Covid19 is not heat, humidity sunlight sensitive.
Then they are claiming that it is pretty much unique among viruses.
How many colds do people get in the summer – it is called a cold for a reason ?
How many flu cases are there in the summer ?
The default assumption should be that any viral infection will be reduce dramatically over the summer. The burden of proof would be on those claiming Covid19 is unusual.
https://www.accuweather.com/en/health-wellness/uv-radiation-from-the-sun-increases-by-a-factor-of-10-by-summer-and-could-be-key-in-slowing-covid-19/703393
Covid19 is a Class III enveloped virus. These are the EASIEST to kill with sunlight.
Its good information, it pretty strongly supports your view. I would like to see the paper itself if and when its sees the light of day. All the same, read the article and you will also see that sunlight is not being seen by the same people as being certain to have a large effect on the rate of the disease.
I already feel comfortable around people outdoors on my daily walks. Its the indoor environment where the spead happens most and sunlight is not likely to be a large effect there.
Electromagnetic radiation, photons, are a fascination of mine. The interaction of photons with matter is a deep subject, one of the deepest in physics.
Your original statement was one of your We Know statements which I usually to interpret to mean that someone said something and you believe it and not that the fact in question is a proven certainty.
I am interested in seeing how they did the study because determining that a virus has been “killed” is not a trivial question. Determining that bacteria are killed or not killed by some treatment is usually a trivial matter, they stop growing in media or on a plate, they stop movement under a microscope.
How would one determine that a virus has been “killed” ? You can’t see them easily, they don’t grow on a plate, you can’t test corona virus to see if it is still active by exposing people and seeing if they get it. My guess is that they determine it by electron microscopy and/or by infecting human cell cultures. I am going to do some reading on that.
Here is a good question: Why am I arguing with you on this where I usually abstain from arguing with you? I usually abstain because the subjects are meaningless to me in the sense that the “debate” is just political opinion and hot air and changes nothing. Also, I don’t like to get into pretending that I know a lot about things that I know no more about than can be found quickly online, which is a pretty thin and usually deceptive education. Here, on this topic I have an education in the general area, though not in virology or epidemiology specifically. And here the subject is important to me, interests me and I would like to be more informed, which debating will help accomplish. So this debate suits my conditions for jumping into it.
So, as long as this stays a reasonable debate based on the most solid information that is available I will be interested in talking about this.
One other thing, here are the last three daily death totals:
Total U.S. coronavirus deaths reported each morning this week: Monday, 40,683. Tuesday, 42,364. Wednesday, 45,075.
Does this look like the pandemic has peaked? Does it look like we will get away light with only 60,000 US deaths?
Not to me it doesn’t.
Take any peice of informmation and there is ALWAYS some contrarian peice of information out there.
With respect to sunlight, heat and humidity and viruses.
The study I cited is only the most recent.
There was one study – FROM CHINA that claimed the amount of sunlight, heat, UV needed to kill Covid19 was beyond what the sun can provide.
I am not aware of any other actual study that reached that conclusion.
Regardless, ALL viruses (and bacteria) are killed by UV. Hospitals have been using UV disinfection for a decade. They use UVC which causes sunburns and skin cancer so disinfection must be done with humans absent. They now have far-UVC and far-UV lamps which kill bacteria and viruses but do not harm humans. We will see these in airports train stations, and similar places in the future.
The UV reaching the ground is proprotionate to the angle of the sun. The more shallow the angle the more of the atmosphere light must pass through to reach the ground, and the more atmosphere the more diminished UV light is. This is also why the hole in the Ozone layer is over antartica. Though it is cosmic rays that destroy the Ozone more than UV.
Because of the rotation and tilt of the earth in the winter not only is the angle of the sun shallower, but daylight hours are shorter.
There is an exponential difference in Summer UV and winter.
Hospital Germicidal UV lamps are high power – because they must work in minutes.
But even low levels of UV kill viruses. They just do not do so as fast.
The same effect can be acheived with 1/10th the power and 10 times the time.
I do not beleive there is a single areosole virus that is not seasonal. That means it MUST be negatively impacted by UV, heat or humidity.
All non-seasonal viruses are spread by direct contact – likely body-body fluid transfers.
Aids as an example has an incredibly short life outside the body. But it is never outside the body.
Corona Viruses are all in the class that is most easily destroyed by UV.
The exponential increase in cases has ended – in the US and world wide.
It ended MORE THAN two weeks ago in the US, we are well past that being a statistical fluke.
The question now is how long before we move from plateau to decline.
Based on EXACTLY the these – curve flattening – that you embrace, if we have been effective at flattening the curve the plateau will be long. If we have failed at flattening the curve the decline will mirror the path up.
But the total number of cases will be unchanged whether we flatten the curve or not.
The total number of deaths will be lower if TWO conditions are met.
The first is that we have effective treatment that reduces the mortality rate.
Our care is excellent much better than that of China and Italy, and Spain.
But the largest portion of deaths are in patients that had a life expectance less than 6 months. And the next largest group are in people we probably can no save no matter what if the get Covid19.
So our impact on mortality is two fold – how large are the number of deaths in people who could actually be saved with really good care. and how does stretching this out increase the risk that this gets into highly vulnerable communities – like old folks homes.
Put simply – it is easily possible that “flattening the curve” causes more deaths – because we are going to have failures to protect at old folks homes and the longer we stretch this out the more we will have.
Next We appear to have “flattened the curve” at about 1/3 or less of our peak hospital capacity. That is a MISTAKE. You want to flatten the curve at a level that is closer to 80-90% of capacity. The further below capacity you flatten the more you protract the epidemic and the more other damage you cause, for no gain.
A protracted plateau will appear to confirm the claims of those sewing panic that we must lock down forever. But in reality it is proof they are WRONG.
A long flat plateau at 1/3 of ICU capacity is a FAILURE.
Actual success would be flattening the curve at about 80-90% of capacity.
That produces two results: the shortest possible plateau. the largest possible reduction in mortality.
But absolutely no curve bending changes the total number of infections.
I would further suggest comparing the daily cases between the US and Sweden – or the daily deaths if you can get that number.
Scaling for population size the curves are the same.
Neither healthcare system has been overwhelmed.
Sweden has taken mostly the same measures as the US, but they have all been done voluntarily, not by force. Further they are not as rigorously adhered to in sweden as the US.
Yet there is no appreciably difference in our results and those of Sweden.
Sweden has also plateaued.
That means several things:
Either mandatory measures are NOT necescary, that voluntary measures even if followed imperfectly are sufficient.
Or the natural behavior of the virus does not give a crap about anything we are doing.
The latter is a very real possibity as countries that have done pretty much nothing seem to have the same curve as the US and Sweden.
What is NOT true is that the US lockdown has produced a demonstrably better outcome than other nations. That is an indictment of the entire “flattening the curve” construct.
Either
we have failed to accomplish it,
we did not use force to do so
Flattening the curve has no actual effect.
I do not know which of those is true, but it is far more likely that one of those possibilities is correct that that flattening the curve worked.
One more prediction.
When this is all over and we have all the data. we will KNOW whether this worked or not.
But we will only hear from the media the failures that have occured – if they are failures of Trump’s alone.
The entire political medical community is heavily incentivized to declare this a great victory.
And of course to demand massive amounts of money to in return for the false promise this will never happen again.
Trump will be claiming to be a hero, The Faucci’s of the world, the WHO, the CDC, the FDA, everyone is going to be claiming to be hero’s.
There are some real hero’s but what already is highly likely to be the real truth is we made this worse, not better.
“Sweden has taken mostly the same measures as the US, but they have all been done voluntarily, not by force. Further they are not as rigorously adhered to in sweden as the US.
Yet there is no appreciably difference in our results and those of Sweden.
Sweden has also plateaued.”
You can only guess why that has happened (if it has actually happened).
Here is my guess: Something in their genetic make up leads to a lower susceptibility. OK, this is hand waving, but so are the other explanations.
A genetic basis for viral susceptibility however is on solid ground.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?cmd=link&linkname=pubmed_pubmed&uid=28973976&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pmc
I could be completely wrong that genetics explains any significant part of the COVID trend in Sweden or anywhere. But its my personal wild guess.
I hardly see how the way that they have responded would have led to a better result. By what mechanism? Herd immunity? I’m not buying it.
“You can only guess”
There is pretty much nothing about this that is not an educated guess at this time.
That is how crisis works. We must make choices based on the information we have.
As to genetics – until the 21st century Sweden was nearly a pure monoculture.
But today 10% of the population is from the mediterainian. Not the most diverse population in the world, but enough that we should see disparate consequences if genetics is the cause.
Further monocultures tend to be less resistant not more.
Small pox was brutal to native americans.
There is alot going on that we do not know. I think lots of our data is crap. I think the number of cases is radically off everywhere. And we do not know how much.
At the same time so long as the means by which we collect the data is relatively consistent, the trends are likely accurate even if the raw data is not.
I said this regarding China months ago. I think the chinese numbers are complete and total crap. but I think the curves created by those numbers are reasonable accurate – if the scale is completely wrong.
We are seeing close to the same progression world wide.
There are differences in the numbers, the height of the curve and the start point. But the shape is roughly the same everywhere. And those few places it is different seem to be because of unique situations like unhealthy aging populations in Italy.
It is highly likely that when we see close to the same patterns in most places, that the same thing is causing those patterns – even if we do not know what that cause is.
I am constantly hearing of stories of a resurgance in China. While like many I might have a barely conscious wish for China to get its comupance. Regardless, I do not want to see more people sick or dying anywhere. Nor do I want to punish the chinese people form the mistakes of their government.
Regardless, thus far there has been no resurgance.
Is that telling us something about the nature of the virus ? Of the nature of the chinese response ? Of the chinese genetically ? Of some kind of natural immunity ?
I do not have the answer to that EXCEPT to say that again throughout the world we are seeing very close to the same patterns. It is highly unlikely that is accidental.
Further the presence of the same pattern dispite different measures means that the measures probably do not have much if any effect.
So do we use force – because that is what government actions are, against people based on your wild guess that even though sweden and the US have the same pattern, that something is genetically different about the swedes ?
There will ALWAYS be some wild, or even not so wild guess to justify using force.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. and will lose both”
Franklin
Sweden did not lead to a better result than the US.
There are a few metrics where Sweden appears SLIGHTLY worse than the US – CURRENTLY.
But the difference is very small, and the swedish model assumes higher initial infection and death levels, but shorter duration and no difference in total deaths and infections in the long run.
Herd Immunity ? the swedish health minister beleives that sweden is developing herd imunity right now.
I do not know.
I think there are only two possible explanations for the patterns we are seeing globally:
1). This is far more contagious than initially beleived and far less deadly, and we have 100M or more people infected globally and have actual herd immunity developing in most places.
2). For any of a number of possible reasons that we do not yet understand the overwhelming majority of people can not get this disease. Or atleast can not easily get this disease.
Genetic immunity is one possible explanation. Another is that it is possible that antibodies from other corona virus provide some degree of immunity to Covid19.
There are other possibilities.
Regardless, there is a pattern and it is far more likely that pattern has a common cause than that the same result is happening throughout the world for different reasons.
I do not need certainty about the cause to be fairly confident there is a pattern.
”
A long flat plateau at 1/3 of ICU capacity is a FAILURE.
Actual success would be flattening the curve at about 80-90% of capacity.
That produces two results: the shortest possible plateau. the largest possible reduction in mortality.
But absolutely no curve bending changes the total number of infections.”
Incredibly counter intuitive. Not everything that is counter intuitive is wrong, so I will listen to your explanation. But I am not going to believe this without a very convincing explanation. Your “success story” sounds like a nightmare. The spread into health care workers would be far worse and then what?
Is this your own personal conclusion or can you find me a well respected expert or experts who believe that 90% ICU capacity is the best route? Links?
David Rubin meets Donald Trump
Vaccine?…Do hold your breath.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616?fbclid=IwAR24Ebb8Jmh3xM5aMmagrBOT_aDjUfqOIklaAwEhKGr9DzqRVP0l24dTeec
Wow! Vaccines are difficult. What is new.
I do not know much about the doctor.
But ABC used that stupidly deceptive chart that attempts to prove Covid19 is much worse in the US than elsewhere – using time vs. total infections without any regard for the population size.
I tend to heavily discount sources that engage in deliberate deception.
If you want me to take you credibly, then be honest.
The Flu is an upper respiratory viral infection and we are able to create a vaccine for each flu variant every year.
There are no cold vaccines because there are atleast 200 different viral cold infections.
There are now vaccines for pnuemonia – there are about 30 different viral pnuemonias.
The vast majority of the doctors comments missuse the concept of difficult.
Nothing she said indicates developing a vaccine is difficult.
Her remarks indicate that the failure rate will be high.
Meaning that most vaccines will not prove successful.
And that TESTING is difficult.
I beleive there are already over 70 contenders.
More red meat for the debate.
https://www.foxnews.com/science/covid-19-hydroxychloroquine-showed-no-benefit-more-deaths-va-virus-study
Interesting, we should not accept the existing studies automatically out of hand, and we should not accept this one automatically either.
This is not that much larger than other studies. It was done nationwide – i.e. on patients in different hospitals accross the country. We know little about hove the patients were selected. Covid19 has radically different mortality rates in different populations. We do not know at what point in the progression of the disease use was started. The study specifically refers to the use of ventalators – Ventalators are increasingly contra indicated for Covid19
The claims of damage to other organs are particularly disturbing. Chloroquine effects are extremely well known this is a drug that has been used on billions of people. Organ damage does not occur except in massive overdoses and over extremely long periods of time.
By far the most common side effect – and even that in less than 1:1000 cases is heart rythm disturbance.
It is possible that the VA has found something new regarding the interaction of hoxcl and covid19. But it is equally possible they do not know what they are doing.
Heart rhythm disturbances that would be of little consequence may be more serious when severe pulmonary stress is occurring from COVID and pneumonia. Heart and lungs are a linked machine.
I am speaking of the top of my head – I did not go back and check this.
But beleive the couple in the southwest that OD experienced severe disruption of their heart beat. That was after a massive overdose.
More generally doctors are advised to do an ekg before using hoxcl and checking for pre-existing rhythm disturbances that hoxcl could make worse. specifically for long Qt.
The detail is not the point. The point is the know what the risks are, and they know what to look for.
There is nothing that you can not overdose on – water, oxygen, air. And absolutely hoxcl has serious problems if you overdose. But absent massive overdoses or long term use there is very little risk associated with a 10 day treatment. And that risk is well understood as well as exactly what to do to eliminate it.
Dr. Didier Roualt reviewed and has responded to the purported refutation study.
There are lots of problems with the studies indicating Hoxcl has a benefit.
Most of those problems are the result of trying to do a study while dealing with a crisis.
Roualt’s work is honest and whatever the flaws they are out in the open.
The flaws in the Magagnoli, MedRxiv study appear to be much more serious. It is difficult to explain those errors without assuming the intent of the study was to produce the outcome they got. I am not talking about confirmation bias where subconscious choices shade you results. I am talking about deliberate choices that are going to produce a specific outcome.
The first is that the HCQ groups had a condition. lymphopenia is apparently an incredibly strong predictor of mortality for Covid19 patients. The HCQ patients started the trial with twice the proportion of lymphopenia as the HCQ+Az patients. NONE of the “control” patients had lymphopenia. All of the deaths in the study were among lymphopenia patients.
Fundimentally all this study proved was what is already known – lymphopenia correlates strongly with death in covid19 patients.
To be clear a large enough study should have lymphopenia in all groups. It is important to know how well anything works against the toughest cases.
The number of lymphopenia in this study was small. So the results among those have a large margin of error, but it is possible to conclude from this study that purportedly refutes the effects of HCQ that it is a 2/3 IMPROVEMENT for the worst patients. The death rate for the very small number of lymphopenia patients was less than the norm.
Next a larger proportion of the HCQ and HCQ+az patients were in more advanced stages.
Significantly more were intubated Before starting HCQ. Intubated patients near universally are fighting a cytokine storm. That is a situation where the patients own immune system starts attacking them – Often usually killing them. HCQ is a treatment against the Covid19 virus. It is NOT a treatment for Cytokine storm. While HCQ should be continued in patients experiencing Cytokine storm, other measures are necescary.
Next 30% of the “Control” group receives AZ. Didier has already published studies that AZ alone is as effective as HCQ in fighting Covid19.
Trying to conduct controlled studies while treating critically ill patients is incredibly difficult.
Lots of issues things are problems. Diddier lost members from all groups because they got sufficiently well and left the hospital and did not participate in follow up. His work has been criticised because patients were removed from groups during the study for this and other reasons.
It is not possible in the midst of a crisis to get perfect control.
It might not even be possible to construct matching control and study groups on all variables.
On that basis alone Diddier’s criticism of the makeup of the studies is perfectionism.
Though including large numbers of patients receiving AZ – a drug beleived to be as effective as HCQ in the control group can not be explained as anything but bias.
The other errors are troubling – but can be statistically resolved in the analysis.
But they were not. It is not possible in real world tests to get identical populations for all study groups. but it is possible using statistical regressions to factor out those issues – at the cost of greater uncertainty in your results.
BTW Didier has another study that has come out that actually is the largest one done so far – 3 times the number of patients in this study and the results confirm his prior studies.
Click to access Response-to-Magagnoli.pdf
Information from the VA Study
The group that was given HCQ had
1) a higher median age,
2) a higher median BMI (more obese),
3) lower SpO2 (blood oxygen levels),
4) higher average breaths per minute,
5) higher average heart rates,
6) higher average blood pressures,
7) higher number of smokers,
8) a higher number suffering from congestive heart failure, 9) higher rate of peripheral vascular disease,
10) a higher rate of cerebrovascular disease, 1
1) a higher rate of dementia,
12) a higher rate of chronic pulmonary disease
13) a higher rate of diabetes.
It’s almost as if they picked the very sickest and most-at-risk patients for the HCQ cohort.
3
Another bit of information – not specifically from the VA study, but that has become public – atleast to me as a result of the VA study.
Aparently their is a racial component to Covid19 something like a 1/3 higher mortality rate for blacks and a mortality rate for hispanics that is higher than whites.
Further as has been noted before there is a higher mortality rate for smokers.
As one commentor noted what the VA has discovered is that old morbidly obese black male smokers with diabetes die more frequently than the rest of us.
This study was on a very sick population – and not from Covid19. But more importantly each study groups was not even close to equally sick and the analysis did not account for that.
NIH is not recomending Against the HCQ+AZ combination – though it remains neutral on HCQ specifically as a result of this study.
Separately the VA Sec. came out and said the VA continues to Use HCQ – because it works. This study was of extremely sick patients and the results should be understood by looking at all the data, not cherry picked conclusions.
Just to be clear – if HCQ does not work – lets find that out and move on.
There is now some evidence that Flowmax is helpful both in prevention and in mitigation.
Add it to the things to study.
But lets quit trying to make political games out of this.
As the VA Sec stated when asked about Trump’s comments – they were aspirational.
And we should all be aspirational.
HCQ should be studied extensively – because it is so cheap and readily available that even if it is not the best possible treatment, it might be the best we can do at large scale quickly.
If Remedsivir is better and can be scaled up rapidly – GO FOR IT.
We should all be for anything that works – even a little, whether Trump back’s it or not.
Another red meat issue for the left. Who really should get the blame.
Trump?
Congress?
Voters?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2020/04/20/seventy-one-publicly-traded-companies-got-paycheck-protection-funding-before-money-ran-out/?fbclid=IwAR3o_u53Ifn-LOyfgQH4wNIl3zJrg7J4vfDk-BgekN3HziIyWUXGF3u5l_4#747452005087
Trump sets the agenda… “This is what I want. Small business, less than 500 employee payroll protection.
Congress gets directive. Writes legislation.
Voters put legislators in congress.
So ultimately I blame voters for electing individuals not smart enough to identify wording that allows companies with hundreds of locations to qualify. And congress for not having advisors smart enough to find the loophole.
If companies can identify loopholes in hours, why cant those running the country?
All of the above.
This stuff does not work.
We know that.
“This is what I want. Small business, less than 500 employee payroll protection.
Congress gets directive. Writes legislation.”
This PPP mess is a great example of how byzantine federal legislation has become.
I spent 2 hours yesterday, on a conference call with the YMCA board, on which I sit. We are a very small. local Y, and we applied for a PPP loan through a relatively small regional bank. We have some very experienced and astute board members (2 of whom are, themselves, banking executives), who were able to put together a successful application, get it through the portal at the stroke of midnight, and we were approved and received the loan.
The problem we now face is this: Our monthly payroll, at the time we applied for the loan, was $58,000 ~ but, that included only 4 fulltime employees, and almost 2 dozen part timers, most of whom made minimum wage, or only slightly higher.
THe rapid shutdown in NJ forced the Y to furlough/lay off almost all of the part-timers. The Y Director and her 3 assistant directors are still working remotely. Most of the part-timers have now applied for unemployment, which includes the additional $600 p/week federal expansion, which raises most of these workers (mostly day care and fitness center workers) to a weekly payout that far exceeds what they would make as payroll employees at the Y.
But, our loan is only forgivable if we continue to maintain our current payroll. Most of those part-timers will not come back, because of the higher amount of unemployment, added to their knowledge that, once the lockdown has ended, they will almost certainly be able to get hired back ~ if not by the Y, then by some other daycare center or fitness business.
We can’t give our 4 salaried people a “raise” because that is not allowable under the current, albeit blurry, guidelines. So most of our loan (only $140,000) will have to be given back, and we are not entirely sure that the portion that we pay out to the director/assistant directors will actually be forgiveable. We may just have to return the whole thing, and use our cash reserves to cover payroll, which is what we were trying to avoid.
Not sure that the average voter should be held accountable for the Catch 22’s that are part and parcel of federal legislation.
Priscilla, So you are saying if employers offer the employee their job back and they refuse, then based on Fed or New Jersey law, they can’t be removed from unemployment.
There has to be some loophole like paid leave genefit to get around that.
Well, we discussed this at length, Ron, and we will likely end up offering them their jobs back, and most of them will end up accepting, because 1) by law, they cannnot remain on the unemployment rolls if they have a bona fide job offer, and 2) they’ll still be getting paid for doing nothing, since the Y is currently closed, and we don’t anticipate reopening until at least June or July, when we might be able to open our camp.
The problem is that most of these people (many of them high school and college kids) are making 3 or 4 times p/week more $$ than they made before the lockdown. On average, with the federal expansion, they are getting $800-$900 a week, and $600 of that is not subject to taxes. (and who knows if NJ will ultimately waive state tax for unemployment during the pandemic?) . The director believes that many of them may simply take their chances on not being penalized for violating unemployment rules. But the board will force her hand, and then we’ll see how many actually come back.
Ironically, the PPP loans were designed to keep people off of unemployment, and in the very same legislation the feds added on the $600, which then incentivizes low-wage employees to want to get laid off.
Jay asks the relevant follow-up question, which is “why can’t we just hire on new people to use up the payroll loan?” And, it’s a very good question, which we have our accounting firm looking into. The guidance on this is unclear, and seems to indidcate that a business must RETAIN their current employees, in order to have the laon forgiven.
The other problem is that the new hire process, especially for a business that operates a daycare, a camp, a swim team, etc. is a fairly long one, involving detailed background checks and follow-ups on references. By the time we were to get these people actually on the payroll, the 2 month payroll payout period would be over.
So, this is not to say that we won’t be able to spend the money ~ the guidance says that we can use excess money for mortgage interest and utilities, although it’s unclear whether that money would be forgiveable. I anticipate many conference calls on this, as other businesses, particularly non-profits, start wading thfough the guidlines.
Snide aside: Socialism isn’t all that bad, when necessary…. 😏
Jay, there is a difference between compassionate spending and socialism.
Compassionate spending is done in an emergency and lifts people back into a productive environment.
Socialism is continual spending to promote a dependant society on government.
“Compassionate spending is done in an emergency and lifts people back into a productive environment.”
Sounds great, but just like socialism – it does not work.
Nor does economic stimulus.
The reasons that socialism, “compassionate spending” and Stimulus do not work are pretty much the same.
Priscilla pointed out the problems she has. So we can fix those, and the ones someone else has, and the ones someone else has. Now you have a 200,000 page bill that no one is going to read and no one is going to know how to take advantage of.
The bottom line is that it is really beyond the capability of government to do much beyond broad measures that will either directly favor big business or be easily gamed by big business and the connected.
We can want “charity and compasion” but it is not something that government can do.
Look at the mess going on with governors.
We have blue state governors defining abortion as an essential service, but hip replacement or cancer treatment or buying guns is not.
We have red state governors that think that buying guns is essential, as is fishing and hunting but abortion is not.
It is just beyond the ability of government to micro-mange pretty much anything.
That includes stimulus.
I keep pushing the swedish model – but I would note that many US states are following that – or some permutation of it. So it is not just the swedish model.
FL has some restrictions, but it is mostly open. It also has one of the oldest populations in the country and it has so far done pretty well at keeping them safe.
We need to shift from shutting everything down and then trying to fix the negative impacts with big piles of money – which can not work, to protecting those at the most risk, and quarantining the actually sick, and making voluntary recomendations to the rest.
And on top of all that- food prices are skyrocketing!
Yep read about that. Price gauging for some items, Shortages due to virus in meat packing plants. and consumer hoarding of staples like Spam driving up cost nationally.
But the one hurting us here is strawberries. F’in Governor’s stay at home does not allow anyone to go out to a strawberry field and pick their own like we do every year. Usually about 1/2 price, so now you drive up, buy the berries and stay in car. Pay 2-3 times the cost.
Makes sense right. Guess if your a democrat it does!
IF you close the economy you will get all kinds of problems like this.
And it will get worse. There is no cure. Even if you manage to fix your strawberry problem, You will see something elsewhere.
Further you have a problem because increasingly fruits and vegetable are sourced worldwide. And that is not happening now, so you can only get what is in season.
Well maybe when the coastal elites cant go into Starbucks and get their $5.00 lattes because coffee is not imported, then they will say ” open America, you are infringing on my rights to free commerce “.
Of course they are – you have completely forked up supply and demand.
These problems will fix themselves once you reopen the economy, until you do you are going to have all kinds of unpredictable negative impacts all over the place.
The economy does not neatly divide into essential and non-essential.
This lockdown nonsense is litterally going to produce massive surpluses and shortages simultaneously – sometimes even in the same goods.
Jay, the things you are bitching about ARE socialism. Yes, it is that bad.
There are people laughing because the right is touting Sweden because they have not shutdown their economy right now – the left cackling that the right is advocating socialism.
But Sweden is not socialsim. It had a brief period in the 70’s and early eighties where it imposed an enormous social safetynet and drove taxes to 80% and littlerally had people who owed more taxes than their income. But they rapidly backed away from that.
Further Sweden quite oddly has an independent free market tradition – one that dates back as far as Adam Smith but occured completely independent of that of the rest of the west. That tradition is in the swedish DNA. Even when they went quasi socialist they did not abandon free market principles. The united states has an economic freedom index of 76.6 Sweden is 74.9 Sweden is ranked 22 globally, the US 17.
If you want actual socialism you should look to Venezuela.
Actual socialism does not work anywhere.
This $3T Stimulus is a form of socialism.
Your criticisms of it apply equally well to socialism.
I do not want to be overly critical of what has been done.
My point is this can not be done “fairly”.
You are back! Its great to see you, I was worried, you appeared and then disappeared again. How are you feeling? How is your family doing?
As a person with real experience what can you tell us about a real encounter with COVID?
??? You can’t hire new part-time workers to replace those who won’t immediately return?
Do you want to do 100 job interviews right now ?
I am greatly opposed to all the shit government is doing.
But the fact that I want the freedom to make my own choices, does not mean I intend to be stupid.
I have postponed all kinds of meetings, that are not critical. I conduct more business by email and phone.
I would be highly inclined to not do something like setup job interviews until this had passed.
Jay, if you are out of work, the law states you dont need to be actively looking for employment, Priscilla offers you a PT job for 20 hrs a week @15.00 an hour for a total income taxable of $300.00 or the state unemployment adds a kicker onto the feds $600 a week untaxable, what’s your choice?
Compassionate spending would be replacing your $300 a week. Socialism is the $600+.
You’re making a distinction between compassionate and un-compassionate socialism, Ron.
All the bail-out money going to BIG businesses— is that GOVERNMENT operating in compassionate corporate socialism mode…?
My point: the US has been a socialist-capitalist nation since the Roosevelt administration’s responses to the 1929 Depression. Complex industrial nations require a balance between the push-pull of those forces. BALANCE is the keyword, not either-or confrontations.
Moderates are tightrope walkers, trying to keep the Left & Right from toppling us into disaster.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/12/02/opinion/03sporting1web/03sporting1web-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp
Jay, the actions were compassionate spending. If we had people in congress, all of them but mostly Pelosi, McCarthy, Shumer and McConnell, who were smart enough to find their own asses with toilet paper to clean themselves, maybe we would not end up with bad legislation like this. Maybe if Pelosi and Shumer had their minions spending as much time analyzing who could get it as they did making sure Trump properties could not qualify for any help, we would not have this issue.
While they are out bad mouthing Trump to the press, that time could be better spent insuring when Trump says ” give me legislation to help small business”, that is what gets written by congress!
Ron, why aren’t you mentioning the bad-mouthing Trump and the GOP CONTINUES UNINTERRUPTED for Biden & the Dems? He’s by nature a divisive lump of feces.
Do you listen to his daily Covid briefings? Today he insulted Biden, Dems, the Press, and suggested the medical community look into injecting disinfectants into our bodies to fight Covid infections.
Trump: President brain Disorder.
Jay, no I do not listen to much of anything “news”.
I watch about 30 minutes of one of the business news programs around 9:00 each morning to get what the markets are doing.
Then I read the local paper.
I watch some of the local TV news to catch what happened locally.
Anything national I check the internet for something I might be looking for. Some of what may catch my eye is on Facebook because I am inundated with left and right Facebook pages and instead of blocking them, sometimes they have something I may be interested in.
And anything Trump, I have a friend that is as apoplectic about him as you are. I have told him that I know Trump lies constantly, he is an asshole, I would not allow him into my home for a conversation, let alone a meal. But he is open about it unlike all the other politicians that are not better than Trump. They just hide it. And in Trump, I support many of his policies, where the others I have no agreement with theirs.at all.
Politicians insult each other! News at 11!
Name one other president in your lifetime who has publicly, frequently, viciously insulted so many other political figures as Trump has?
He’s lowered civility standards to the level of wrestling match disrespect.
Name one president in US history who was illegally investigated by the FBI and a Special counsel for colluding with a foriegn government – when the foreign government was actually colluding with his opponent ? And where 1/4 of the country actually beleived that bullshit.
Where the media was spreading that lie every single night ?
However nasty Trump is publicly – he is a tame pussy cat compared to his detractors.
How many of those people who he has purportedly attacked have said things publicly about him that would be slander or libel were he not a public figure ?
How many of the insults that Trump has lobbed have been false ?
If you are going to lie about someone, I think you can expect that they will get angry and say mean – and usually true things back about you.
The civility was gone long before Trump.
Every republican presidential candidate in my lifetime and nearly every republican has been called a racist and a nazi.
Nothing Trump has done compares to what you and your ilk have been doing long before Trump.
You can not by force compasionately spend someone else’s money.
Robin Hood & his Merry Men disagree…
Absent the claim in the story that the Sheriff has illegally usurped the kings position while he was away fighting the crusades, Robin Hood and his merry men are thieves.
They can disagree all the way to jail.
You are correct that we have had elements of socialism in the US since FDR – though smaller amounts since Wilson.
You are incorrect that they are required. They did not work for Wilson. They did not work for FDR who had to burn much of the new deal to prepare for and win the war.
Socialism – even that of FDR is horribly inefficient. That has not changed.
Since 1998 (the chart only goes back that far) those areas of the economy most deeply involved with govenrment – almost everything medical, almost everything involving eduction have increased in price – almost 4 times as fast as inflation.
Wages have increased – maybe 10% faster than inflation.
Housing and food costs have increased as fast as inflation. Clothing and furniture costs – have not increased.
Electronics, toys, Phones, TV’s have DECREASED in cost.
Throughout the 19th century – up through FDR the cost of EVERYTHING decreases slowly over time. And wages decreased more slowly than other costs, resulting in a significant rise in standard of living.
https://reason.com/2020/04/21/government-involvement-drives-up-costs/
Aside from the fundimentals of the social contract – punishing violence and fraud, enforcing agreements, and allowing those harmed to hold accountable those who harmed them – the same roles government has always had, there is no benefit to government involvement in the economy or anything else.
You are complaining about this “stimulus” I join you.
It is not governments job to protect us from nature. It is also not possible.
The evidence is increasingly that nothing our government has done has done any good.
NYT and WAPO noted that the true number of deaths is higher than those killed by the disease. They claimed atleast an additional 28,000 deaths from this.
I agree. But these are deaths BECAUSE of government actions.
Those who have died (or will die) because virtually no medical care is considered essential.
Cancer patients are not getting treated, Dentists and not improving peoples oral hygene, Hips are not being replaced, Depression and suicides are increasing.
And on and on.
And these will get worse, and the unrest will grow. Today it is mostly only those towards the extreme protesting, but with each day a few more will join them.
The world appears to have peaked. The US appears to have peaked. Sweden appears to have peaked. There is little to distinguish the results in Sweden from those in the US – except that the economic carnage is not so great.
What is the evidence that our government ? Or any other nation that has locked down has done any better than those that have not ?
Jay, you are not a moderate.
I am pretty sure that moderates do not engage in ad hominem, moderates do not judge proposals based on who made them without bothering to find out what they are.
I hope moderates are not so easily deceived by liars as you.
Quietly coming out as we focus on Covid19 is that it is now clear that the FBI considered Steele to be a “russian asset” or more accurately a russina dupe, since 2015. That the FBI and CIA, and State department under Obama did not consider him credible about anything, they felt he was spreading disinformation – propganda fed to him by the Russian government.
Until late 2016 when they failed to get there FISA warrant on Carter page, and needed to hype up the Steele dossier to bolster claims they new were nonsense so that they could further spy on Trump.
It is now coming out that even that vaunted Intelligence committee assessment that you have been selling for nearly four years – was garbage based primarily on the Steele Dossier.
That the only demonstrable effort of the russians to interfere in the 2016 election was that of providing Hillary amo to take out Trump – aka the Steele Dossier, that prior IC assessments and numerous analysts that were excluded from the late 2016 ICA had concluded that Putin thought he could work with Clinton better than with Trump. That their policies were better aligned and that Clinton did not have any core values.
But you think you are moderate ?
The problem is it is not possible to craft legislation that actually fits against each individual or businesses needs, even it it were possible it would be trivial to game that legislation.
And everything done to craft the legislation and prevent gaming it, makes it sufficiently complex as to be indecipherable.
Next, if this “stimulus” money is not increasing what is produced then it is inherently being wasted. We might as well pile it up and light it on fire.
The goods and services we are not producing, mean our standard of living is lower. We are poorer. Changing the amount of money floating around does not change that at all.
I can think of worse ways government could have stimulated the economy – ARRA, TARP come to mind.
But this is not especially effective.
Further many many businesses slip through the cracks. I doubt that most small businesses that were eligible have applied. Obviously some have – an enormous amount of money has been lit on fire. But most have not. Many small businesses that are eligible do not even know they are. There is a cost just associated with chasing after government money, as well as risks. As you note, they are giving it away, but for a loan to be forgiven you have to meet criteria that based on circustances outside your control might be unmeetable.
Jay, good question, and the answer is…We don’t know, but probably not. I went into more detail in my response to Ron.
Thanks, Roby! I’m feeling pretty much back to normal at this point. I was considered a “mild case,” although mild cases can range from a few days of sniffles to what is more like a bad flu. I ended up with the bad flu version, and that’s pretty much how I felt ~ fever, cough, nausea, and the absolute worst fatigue ever. And it lasted for 3 weeks, which I was not expecting; even now, more than a week after my “official” recovery, I have lingering fatigue, although it’s definitely getting better each day.
I did not have, nor did my husband (yep, both had it at the same time) any breathing issues, which is the trigger for hospitalization. I barely had a cough at all, my husband had a very bad cough, and we both had chest pain. Interestingly, my husband, who had a viral pneumonia about 20 years ago, and during his covid illness was hacking away like crazy, recovered much faster than I did. He was sick for maybe a week/week and a half. I was still struggling with symptoms for twice that time. And I’m younger, dammit!! Lol.
All that said, we were lucky. I really wish I knew if we have immunity now, and, if so, for how long. To be honest, the “not knowing” part of this, combined with the general hysteria and fear surrounding the disease, may be the worst part of it. Or, at least for me it was. I kept calling my doctor and asking her if I should go to the hospital, because I thought I should be getting better faster. Thank God, she kept shutting that down. But I was an emotional wreck for a few days.
Anyway, I’ve been reading through the recent posts, and getting myself back up to speed here on TNM. One thing I should mention, since it’s come up. My doctor did prescribe Azythromicin (Z-pac) for me, and I think it helped. No hydroxychloroquine, since Rutgers is doing a massive clinical study on it, and my doctor is of the opinion that she’ll wait until there is more data. But I think that the z-pac helped a great deal. Although she did prescribe it at my 2 week mark, so maybe I was getting better anyway, or maybe taking medication had a psychological effect. Who knows?
Our hospital system has been redesigned for a long time to avoid hospitalization unless absolutely necescary and to get people out as quickly as possible.
That is even True during a pandemic.
People go to the hospital when they need interventions that can not be done at home or outpatient.
Unless you are deathly ill you do not want in a hospital – no matter what you have.
“The problem is it is not possible to craft legislation that actually fits against each individual or businesses needs, even it it were possible it would be trivial to game that legislation.
And everything done to craft the legislation and prevent gaming it, makes it sufficiently complex as to be indecipherable.”
I actually 100% agree with this. I will add that unintended consequences of legislation are impossible to prevent, or often, (not always) to foresee. And you will agree with me I believe.
Yes, I agree.
I hope you consider this more seriously. This particular problem – while not the only flaw in socialism, govenrment economic intervention, is ALWAYS present.
After the collapse of the USSR we got lots of economic data on what was actually going on.
One of the things we discovered is that it was incredibly common that the USSR was not able to produce goods, because of very fundimental planning failures. Someone forgot that tractors needed green paint, and production stopped when the green paint ran out, and no one was willing to stick out their neck and use red paint, and doing so was dangerous for other reasons – because that red pain was centrally planned for some other purpose – use it and production of that item would fail.
I would suggest reading Leonard Reed’s “I, Pencil” – it is a very incomplete analysis of the myriads of things that must happen just to make a pencil. There have been spinoffs – like “I, Whiskey” and youtube video’s if you do not like to read. The core message is not specific to pencil’s it is true of everything.
‘
One of the messages I have tried to convey is that the free market is very much a massively decentralized multiprocessing system. In fact it strongly resembles the human body in that way. Myriads of things are occuring concurrently AND it is dynamically adapting to changing conditions. Back in the 40’s and 50’s there was an economic debate over what was called the “economic calculation problem” this is fundimental to why socialism – and ALL big government can not work. Government disrupts the signaling mechanism of markets – prices, which serve far more purposes than most of us understand. They are like hormones in the body telling us what to make and how to reallocate resources.
Government intervention is like hitting the body with a massive does of dopamine, or adrenaline and expecting that not only will the body respond to that dopamine and adrenaline, but it will continue to do everything else that it normally does without interference.
Maybe, you and I might believe that a doctor can give a single patient the drug they need at the time they need it.
But what doe you think the odds that our politicians have that same level of skill ?
Father they are not practicing on one patient buy 100’s of millions. And most of them do not have the slightest clue about economics.
Oh I definitely know that, Dave. I think that the very fact that I even considered going to the hospital, in my relatively decent condition, was a symptom of the fear that I had, from reading and listening to too many reports about the death toll from the virus.
Seriously, there were a couple of days there where I was probably having a pretty strong anxiety spiral.
Perfectly natural to be anxious or more. Now you have hindsight and know how the story came out. At the time, who would not be worried or scared? Totally human. Glad your husband also came through well.
We are free to run our own lives as we please. We can be strongly influenced by fear and anxiety, and though usually wrong on rare occasions those prove right.
But we can not run the lives of others based on our personal anxieties.
I am not looking to be critical of those who are anxious. We all read the same information and respond to it differently.
I do have a problem with the fact that a substantial majority of the media goes a single way on all issues. We do not know about Remedsivir or HCQ, Does that mean we can not be hopeful ?
There are some things that have occurred that I have serious problems with – the conduct of the WHO and CCP in particular. But most of the other “experts” have been wrong alot, they have also been way way way over cautious. But I do not beleive they were so deceiptfully.
Even the govenors many of who I disagree with – I still think even though they are wrong, and I think acting beyond their authority are doing so with mostly honest intentions – for politicians. They may be thin skinned and not good at taking criticism. But wrong is not the same as deceiptful.
I can not give much of the press the same credit.
And some people ? The PragerU interview of new yorkers who would rather have millions die than see trump reelected was very very disturbing.
My sister had problems at about the same time as you. She was tested but before the results came in she got worse and was told to go to the hospital.
At the ER they determined she did not have Covid19, she did not have the flu, she had a heart attack several weeks before and was suffering the after effects.
She was given Nitroglycerin and told to go home. there was nothing they would do for her at the hospital.
I hope your sister is doing alright, Dave. My brother in law had a similar event, although his was more emergent, so he got some care. He has an implanted defibrillator, which failed to deploy when he went into cardiac fibirillation. My sister in law called 911, he was brought to the hospital where they used cardiac defibrillator paddles to bring his heart back into rythym. Turns out his implant was set too low, so they reset it, and sent him home. In a non-covid world, he probably would have stayed in the hospital for 2-3 days to have a catheterization and other tests, to determine if there were multiple causes for his problem. He did actually get a covid19 test, which was negative. He jokes that he engineered the whole event so that he could get tested.
I am very worried about the “non-covid” public health implications of suspending so many medical procedures, some of which you’ve mentioned in your comments.
In addition to them, there is the issue of domestic abuse, a likely “epidemic” of relapsed alcoholism, and suicides (which, in NYC, are being coded as covid19 deaths, despite no testing)
There is probably a good likelihood that , when this is finally over, and some time has passed, we will realize that there were more deaths caused by the lockdown than by the virus.
The longer this lasts the more problems – even deaths we will have. You can not keep a wide variety of other health problems from occuring just because you want the medical system to focus on Covid19.
My sister appears to be doing fine. My mother had a more severe heart attack when she was 50. My sister is near the same age. My mother died 27 years later of colon cancer.
Obviously it is a concern. but there is not much I can do.
We may discover many things – but they are not likely to get much attention.
The incentives – for both the left and Trump are to make this appear worse than it is and to declare there was a victory that would not have happened without them.
It’s an interesting set of data. Every study on medical issues is only a single data point. The big picture emerges from a large number of studies. I never see the results of a single study as “proof” I see them as support if they are well done. I did not put huge faith in the pro hoxyl studies and I will also not consider this study to be a knock out blow. But it seems to be an important set of data.
This post of mine was a reply to your Fox news hoxyl study that found it ineffective.
Roby Looking back 24 months from now, it is going to be very interesting seeing what was right, what was wrong and how we got through this especially if a vaccine can not be developed before 2021 fall season.
Right now there are studies that say “A” worked and the next day there are studies that say “A” did not work. The information on the media and web are all designed for division because 50% of the people are going to believe one report and 50% the other. If factual information was the desire to educate the public, no study would be leaked until all the clinical information was released as to the timing of the administration of the drug (was the patient at home, in the hospital in serious condition, critical condition or hours to live when given), underlying medical conditions, etc. Each of these have very important impacts on outcomes and that is not being shared, so we have the “Wow, Trumps right, it works” or “There goes that ass again, promoting something and lying to the public” comments based on little factual data.
I am pretty much completely at odds with you on this.
Our leaders, our doctors AND the general public should have the best possible information at the moment. EVEN information that is of poor quality.
It is the nature of rapidly moving problems that the quality of information – particularly near the start is poor.
But decisions must be made – by leaders, doctors and by each of us as individuals,
And we must make those decisions based on the best information at the moment no matter how poor the quality. We should also be told the quality of the information so we know how much weight to give it.
In the end several other ingredients will inform out decisions.
Experience, history and instincts.
Dave “Our leaders, our doctors AND the general public should have the best possible information at the moment. EVEN information that is of poor quality.”
Well again you missed the point.
I have no problem with anyone making a decision based on the best information possible.
I do have a big problem with studies of minimal number of subjects being leaked to the press and then if you are a republican you go ape shit crazy saying how great it is and if your a democrat you have a shit hemorrhage saying how bad it is. Both happen because of politics and political agendas.
But it will never change other than to get worse.
“Roby Looking back 24 months from now, it is going to be very interesting seeing what was right, what was wrong and how we got through this especially if a vaccine can not be developed before 2021 fall season.”
Exactly my point of view!
It is natural for people to look for patterns and generate hypotheses. But, the more complex a problem is the less likely it is that the answers will be clearcut. This pandemic is as complex a problem as you could find. People read too much into single data points or interesting observations (which may have many hypothetical causes and the most obvious theory may be wrong). People’s politics seem to heavily influence which theories they are attracted to, which does not help the situation.
Personally I suspect a large genetic component in who suffers worst, including by countries and regions. That is my personal suspicion for why one country or area gets wacked and another gets off light. I don’t think its the complete answer but I think it may have a significant role. Time will tell. And it likely will not tell all; in two years there will be plenty of unanswered questions. AIDS research progressed on the time scale of decades.
We do not have decades for this.
Your point is pretty much exactly where you and I disagree the most.
We must make choices NOW, based on the information we have – as poor as it is.
Abolutely in 18 months we will know exactly what choices we should have made.
This is also one of the problems with the fallacy of the experts.
They are going to be wrong too. That is not their fault it is the nature of the problem.
There are lots of comparisons of this to War, and some of those are apt.
Patton had the highest casualty rates per combat day of US units during WWII.
But he actually had the lowest overall rate of deaths.
He attacked fast took heavy losses and ended the fighting by accomplishing the objective.
The so called “precautionary principle” quite frequently (possibly always) results in more harm than any alternative.
“You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”
― Donald Rumsfeld
“We do not have decades for this.”
But decades will pass anyhow and research will make its steady progress. Perhaps it will go faster than I think, the power of biological science is growing all the time, what has happen in my short life time is fantastic, it dwarfs progress in all of human history. And, we have the immunology and virology progress that came due to AIDS as a foundation.
I am glad you feel a sense of urgency. I do too. About the medical side and about the economic side.
Absolutely time will produce amazing results.
No one is arguing we should stop work on this in the future.
One of our advantages right now is that lots of work done on SARS and MERS is applicable.
One of our disadvantages is that after those fizzled we gradually lost interest. Some work that would be further along had we continued to work to defeat SARS and MERS is less far along than it could be.
As to urgency – this is not optional. The protests you are seeing now are the tip of the iceberg. Resistance to the lockdown is also likely viral in nature.
40% of americans are under employed or unemployed right now. 70% of americans can not afford to miss a single pay check. The lines at food banks are historic.
None of this gets better with time. There are clips of people saying they are starving in america. I think that is hyperbolee right now. But it will not be for long.
GDP has tanked 28% that has not happened since the great depression. There is no impediment to rapid recovery. HOWEVER, the longer this goes on the worse that gets.
meat packers are shutting down. That means that cattlemen will either have to find the money to feed their herds or slaughter or starve them. It will take years to recover if that occurs. Many of the facets of the economy that are being decimated – will come back quickly.
Even some of the ones we are most concerned about. Temporary cost cutting measures are easily reversed. Long term cost cutting measures are not easily reversed.
GDP down 28% means we are producing 2/3 of what we produced 3 months ago.
No amount of money will make the things we have not produced appear.
It you whomp the economy in the knees with a baseball bat without breaking bones – it will come back pretty fast. If you shoot it in the knee caps, it may never recover.
I have a sense of urgency because this is urgent.
Personally I can hold out much longer than most.
But lots of people can’t. Most people can’t.
Those of us who are fortunate – and that is likely almost ever poster here, are not seeing haw bad this is for much of the country.
We agree.
And by the way, I approve of trump giving a shoot to kill on the Iranian boats. Unless of course that blows up into a hell of an unnecessary mess, in which case in perfect hindsight I will disapprove.
Roby, I agree, but I have one question just for consideration.
When an unfriendly threatens our military assets and men, why is there so much red tape the president needs to announce something and then the pentagon has to meet and develop rules of engagement. Why the hell arn’t those in place well before entering enemy territory?
I am not sure that I agree with everything in this but alot of it is quite good.
Particularly interesting is some of the demographic statistical methods he uses to factor out data that has quality problems.
We already know that data on the number of daily infections is relatively poor quality.
We really have a very poor idea of how many people are infected.
Data on number of daily deaths is generally accepted as a better metric, but that is not measured the same from country to country. Further we know that in many instances Covid19 deaths are just trades against deaths from other causes.
So how do we find the real impact of Covid19 ?
This paper uses the change in Daily deaths in that country from the year before.
That is a pretty good metric. It mostly eliminates all the questions about how we measure Covid19. It also focuses on what matters – what has changed.
In the long run we are going to have to look at longer data. Because this will not tell us that Covid19 killed someone that would have died in 6 months. But it will eliminate the problem of making Covid19 look worse than it is because it kills people that would have otherwise died of the flu.
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/04/62572/
There was an interesting interview on Fox with Dr. Stephen Smith, a noted epidemiologist concerning hydroxychloquine. His take on this drug and its effectiveness and side effects was based almost completely on dosage. To much =bad lasting side effects.
He commented that the studies they have information on shows dosage of this drug has a much higher impact on effectiveness and adverse outcomes than most other drugs. (Numbers I use here are examples, I dont know dosages given) Most drugs can be given to a 100 lb woman or a 300 lb man, example 50mg or 100 mg. Also that goes for diabetics, heart disease patients, etc. He stated this is not true for HC. They have found dosage is much more dependent on medical conditions, weight, etc. So if a 100lb women would do OK with 200mg, a 300 lb man might need 400mg. For diabetics, the body absorbs the drug in a different manner. He did not clarify that.
So at the center for disease control he heads, they are working with docs on different dosages for different body types/ co-morbid conditions.
There are two different issues here.
What does’s cause side effects – that is already well known. As I understand it aside from a small risk of heart issues in a small number of people who can be identified before perscribing as well as the heart issues even in ordinary people from MASSIVE overdoses, there are no real side effects from short term use. There are several dangerous side effects from long term use, but Covid19 treatment is not long term use.
The next is what dose treats Covid19 for each given patient. That is why we do studies.
If we had years to get it right we could fine tune the criteria. We do not.
We expect Doctors to excercise judgement and hopefully report results, so that other doctors can benefit from their experience.
I think there are useful things to be gleaned from the VA study.
Among those that HCQ is likely too little too late for patients in cytokine storm.
And that we need to classify the effect on mortality rates. It is not enough to say this did or did not help 100 random people. That we should compare the mortality of similarly situated patients.
Data from NYC is now saying that 88% of ventalated patients die. As an example.
Dr. Roualt indicated it was improper to compare the outcome of HCQ patients on ventalators to control patients who were not. But it is appropriate to see what the outcome of ventalated HCQ patients is compared to non HCQ. It the venataled death rate on HCQ is 50% rather than 88% – I think thousands of people would consider that a win.
And if it is unchanged – then do not use HCQ for ventalated patients.
Dave, I go back to my comment to Roby.
There is too much crap on the internet being reported by people who have little information that gives data to make educated decisions. Then Trump jumps all over HC being the wonder drug to cure Covid-19 and the left has a shit hemmorrage over his promoting it and attacks every report that comes out that indicates any possibility it might work.
It is being used as another method to divide America!
Well apparently Remedesivir flopped in its first trial in China.
Please do not take that as my pissing over Remedesivir.
I want us to find something that works.
Sooner rather than later.
Cheaper rather than more expensive.
Nut mostly something that works.
Remedsivir, HCQ any of the 20 other things in WHO tests.
Nor do I think a single study is determinative either way – especially the type of studies we are doing.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-gilead-sciences/gileads-coronavirus-drug-flops-in-first-trial-ft-idUKL3N2CB412
I think you have the cart before the horse.
We are divided. Covid19 is not dividing us, it is just further exposing our division.
We have been divided to some extent forever – a 2 party system must be divided.
But today the bitter nature of that decision is primarily from one side.
Today’s Joseph MacCarthy’s are on the left. Today those silencing ideas they do not like, silencing dissent are on the left.
When I was a teen it was Republicans that told me the police should always be respected, that I should presume they were right, that our mayors, governors senators, and president were authority figures deserving our respect. That if there were problems they were small.
But that I should trust our government as it encroached on our civil rights.
Today it is democrats who are calling protest a crime, acts of civil disobedience evil insubordinate, and unpatriotic. It is the left that is the control freaks unwilling to trust people to “do their own thing”.
Covid19 is just the battleground of the moment.
“It is being used as another method to divide America!”
Politics is the art of dividing people, the art of convincing people that they are being screwed by some group. You win an election by dividing people and promising to fix it. Politics is like war, we all know its idiotic but we don’t know how to stop it.
So today was remdesivir’s turn to have a bad day. I am disappointed but not surprised.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/23/data-on-gileads-remdesivir-released-by-accident-show-no-benefit-for-coronavirus-patients/
FInding effective antiviral medications is harder than curing cancer, anyhow we have had less success. Perhaps this pandemic will mark a turning point in our anti-viral progress but won’t be fast unless we are incredibly lucky. COVID is going to stay with us, a new reality of the human race, back again and again. It cannot be put back in the bottle. Pray god this isn’t one of the viruses that learn to mutate quickly.
I have a LOT of faith in the power of science to solve anything that IS solvable in the long run.
The question that most interests me and that I hope research is already going in is the obvious question: why it is so variable and has so little effect on some and kills others? That is the $50,000 question. I expect that many labs are already working on finding the genetic basis of the variability, which alleles of which genes are the ones that confer near immunity and, in contrast, bad outcomes. This is done with cancer, it is a very powerful tool, albeit it is not by any means fully worked out. But if you get cancer they will do a survey of the alleles of your genes that are known to be involved in cancer and the results will determine your treatment in many cases.
That is where I see the best chance to make COVID an unpleasant but not catastrophic reality for our species.
Already has!
https://www.newsweek.com/sars-cov-2-coronavirus-mutate-study-china-1499503
Yep, I am not shocked. However, actually, as the article notes not all mutations make the virus more deadly, some make it less deadly.
The flu has gone through many cycles of mutation and produced more deadly and less deadly forms over the centuries we have followed it. This is a really good paper on the Influenza virus and its history and much of it is probably going to be applicable to Coronaviruses.
https://sfamjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01492.x
BTW, I can tell you (it may not be music to your ears) that Chinese science is now highly regarded internationally. I edit a Russian journal that reports studies on the prestige and publication rates of the scientists of the countries of the world in highly ranked International journals and numbers of patents by country. USA and China are at the top of the heap with China moving steadily upward with regard to the metrics that are used to judge scientific output at a country level. Russia is ranked very low in this race, the articles admit it, they have fallen far behind in publications and in patents. Their candor (and the transparency of their ranking methods, which are same ones that are conventionally used in the US and elsewhere) make me believe that their assessments of the levels of science by country are accurate.
Roby, China being second in scientific research does not surprise me. They are extremely talented in those fields and I would not be surprised if many of their leading research scientists and doctors are not western educated.
And I am not against all Chinese products. Things like the Buick Envision appears to be a quality product. I phones appear to be quality products. What I object to is consumer products that cost 50% of what a former product cost no longer made anywhere but China with a useful life of 25% of the original product. And then not having any parts to fix them if it is not a disposable product.
And I dont have a problem when I know its Chinese made. I messed up an engine on a 1975 Troy Built tiller, so I need a new engine. I can buy one with a 90 day guarantee for $150.00, about a third of the cost for one made elsewhere with a 2 year gaurentee. Knowing it is Chinese made 6.5 hp motor, if I get 2 years out of it tilling up two gardens taking 3-4 hour total each year, then I can buy another in 2 years and be ahead. I would think I should be able to get 8 hour of run time. Even Harbor Freight would not sell them getting less than that.
Not being able to fix things today is not an uncommon problem.
There is a holy war going on between farmers and farm equipment producers on what is called “the right to repair” it does not matter whether it is a $50 smartphone of a couple of million dollar combine, modern products are often incredibly technically complex, and difficult and expensive to repair. You can throw out a $50 smartphone. You can not do that with a $5M combine.
At the opposite end of thing many less expensive products are being made deliberately unrepairable. People used to repair toasters and appliances.
But it is possible to make a toaster much cheaper AND more reliable, if you manufacture it with more permanent connections. if as an example you rivet things together, they last longer and cost less than screwed connections and are much more reliable. But they are 10 times harder to repair.
Yep true “At the opposite end of thing many less expensive products are being made deliberately unrepairable. ”
China noted for it. Make a product and sell for 75% of what it would cost for a USA made product, make it so it last 50% shorter life and have no way to fix it and have people tell buyers what a great price they are getting.
In most cases unrepairable products last LONGER, and are cheaper.
Would you pay twice as much for a toaster that lasted half as long but was repairable ?
If so and there are enough people like you – then that toaster will exist.
One of the other problems is that even if you could make a $9 toaster that was repairable,
Who is going to repair it ?
Most appliance repair shops have closed. Not because things can not be repaired, but because if it takes you an hour to repair an appliance you have to charge $50 to do so to make an acceptable living today. Almost no one will spend $50 to repair most appliances.
Manufacturers do not make repairable appliances because there are no repairmen.
The fight involving farmers is different. Absolutely you will repair a $500K tractor.
The problem today is with the government. The DMCA essentially made repairing devices that have computers in them illegal.
I spent 4 years designing some of the systems that go in agricultural equipment.
They are highly computerized today. And you can tap into the CAN bus on the device and if there are any problems it will tell you exactly what those are.
But you need the software that is capable of understanding the messages that the equipment sends out. Most of the codes for things like engines and transmissions – the parts that you find on cars are standardized – J1939, that is why you can buy an ODBII device and software and connect it to your car and computer and know how fast the engine is rotating, whether it is misfiring, what the fuel level is. The automobile industry is highly standardized (though there are some exceptions)
The same diagnostic equipment will work on your boat or your tractor, or even giant wood chippers and logging equipment – for the engines and the components that are also on cats.
But all the messages for the other components, the pesticide spray nozzles the plows, the tillers, .. are proprietary. They are non-standard and not the same from manufacturer to manufacturer. And the equipment makers will not share them, and it is illegal today to do what you could do legally a couple of decades ago and reverse engineer them.
Today if you figure out what the codes and messages are for failure on a proprietary device and you publish that information – you will get a DMCA takedown notice and if you fail to obey, you could be charged criminally.
BTW the same is true of medical devices.
And just to be clear China did not create this problem WE – the good ole US of A did.
Manufacturers lobbied congress and reverse engineering which has been legal for all of history is now illegal in the US.
If you are up to replacing the engine – then go to an auction or ebay or facebook marketplace, You can likely buy the same product – albeit with some other component broken and with two of the same thing you can come up with enough good parts to make one work, and you can do so cheap.
My wife bought a brand new honda several years ago. If she drives it to the end of her life she probably will not put more than 100K miles on it, It is new and she is getting 10yr warantees on much of it, her repair bills are very low, but every month she has a car payment.
My car died, I bought a 15yr old Audi A6 Quatro Allroad. it had 117K miles. It is older but much nicer than her car. It has leather seats, luxury features throughout, All wheel drive, it is one of the best cars made for snow and other bad weather, Excellent handling, and acceleration. It is much heavier and far safer in an accident, But it gets half the gas mileage hers gets. It costs more to maintain, but it only cost 1/5 as much to buy. I have no car payments, and if I get 100K or two years from it I am way ahead.
I can quite litterally throw away an older luxury car, when repairs become too much.
Dave, I have been viewing you tube videos on these old Tecumseh 6 HP engines and now understand the process to get to the internal part of the engine. I can buy connecting rods, but if I scored the crankshaft, then would need one and that would be going your route. But shipping one of these engines can be very expensive since they weigh 50+ lbs. I might be able to find good crank with a return if it is damaged.
Thanks
20m in away from me every month there is an equipment auction (likely canceled until the lockdown is over).
At that auction several hundred peiced of machinery are sold every month.
Tractors, garden tractors, tillers, …. I would be shocked if I could not find something with a working motor that could be used for your device for under $50.
Or alternately a complete new/used tiller.
I have bought lawn tractors with out mower decks but otherwise working with 12HP engines for $50. I have bought lawnmowers and tillers and … for $10-$20.
I have bought 10 used weed eaters for $1 for parts to repair my existing weed eaters.
If I want to spend a bit more – Craigslist and Facebook marketplace are out there.
These are typically selling local widgets.
If you can fix what you have great.
I would not bother. Used lawn equipment of all kinds is readily available at auction cheap.
I once replaced the engine in a car. The car worked for several years afterwords.
But I am never doing that again.
I buy landmowers cheap on Craiglist or at auction – because if my kids kill them or bend the shafts when they hit rocks I can toss them and pick up another for $10-25.
My wife bought a $600 Honda. it is a fine mower. But I could have but 20 mowers that were nearly as good, and I would not care if they broke.
I told you about my Car. I paid $2800 for a 2005 Audi A6.
If I get 2 years out of it I am way ahead.
in fact if it died tomorow I would still have paid about $1.mile plus gas, for its use.
And I really like the car. And I expect it will last several years.
Then i will do it again.
I am not surprised by what you are saying with respect to science.
I would strongly recomend Julian Simon’s timeless, “the ultimate resource II”.
It is now available for free online. While the most substantial portion of it is proof that in area after area our malthusian claims of impending doom are just poppycock.
The central thesis of the book is that the “ultimate resource” – the only resource that matters, is the human mind. That increasing the number of minds increases standard of living exponentially.
The mind is not the only factor. It is just the foundational one. Large numbers of people in poverty advance slower than large numbers in the first world. Large numbers of people under repressive regimes advance slower than those under less repressive regimes.
China has 4 times the population of the US. It has 4 times as many very very smart people – no matter where you slice things. China should completely dominate the world in science.
It does not, only because it is being held back by its low but rising standard of living, and its repressive political environment.
Ron fixates on other nations stealing our “intellectual property”
This fixation is pretty much nonsense. Stealing the ideas of another AT BEST gives you a short term advantage. Ideas are infinite. The most critical thing that China can learn from any US patent, ….. is that some specific problem has been solved.
If you know that some problem is solveable – with todays thechnology, resources and engineering, and you are smart enough – you can solve it again, a different way, and faster than was done the first time.
There are major areas China is way behind the US, but most of those are spcificially tied to handcuffs that the political and economic thinking in china impose. Much, but not all of the chinese economic model is very 19th and early 20th century, One of china’s most abundant resources is labor and chinese thinking is heavily influenced by that. Further the politics and the lack of political freedom negatively impact even development in areas of science that appear to have nothing to do with science.
Regardless, I do not care that the chinese, or my personal competitors are “stealing” my “intelectual property” – if they are smart enough to take advantage of it – they were smart enough to come up with it in the first place on their own. And if they are not smart enough to take advantage of it, what does it matter that they stole it ?
It is further a stupid idea that we should slow down these advances.
Coming up with a better way to do something gives you a very short time advantage over your competition. That is all. Unless they are stupid they will independently come up with another way than yours to match your advantage, and you will be the one playing catchup.
I think I read somewhere that the virology lab in Wuhan, suspected of accidentally releasing the virus, was conducting research very similar to that of some labs in the US, and was very focused on discovering results faster than the American labs. As a result of what they saw as a competition, they were playing fast and loose with some basic safety procedures, and that’s how a lab tech ended up being infected, and transmitting the virus at the wt market.
I don’t think that there is any general consensus that this is how the virus started, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
I don’t know if either of you know anything about this, but I keep reading/hearing about tigers in the Bronx Zoo testing positive for the coronavirus. I’m sort of baffled by this for a few reasons ~ how the heck do you test a tiger for corona? A swab test? Blood test? Why would you even test for it, in the first place? And, assuming the answer to that is to discover whether there can be animal to human transmissions other than from bats and pangolins, why not test domestic animals?
Priscilla, you might be interested in this. Yes it’s CNN but nothing political that I can see in it.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/22/health/cats-new-york-coronavirus-trnd/index.html
the picture is of something else, but shows an answer to your question.
Priscilla, you might be interested in this. Yes it’s CNN but nothing political that I can see in it.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/22/health/cats-new-york-coronavirus-trnd/index.html
the picture is of something else, but shows an answer to your question.
We do not know the facts. I heard a slightly different version of the same story you are repeating.
The Lab story has minimal data to support it.
But frankly the wet market story is increasingly less credible.
None of the currently earliest known cases had ties to the wet market,
and bats were not among the things sold at the wet market.
The lab is about a mile away – so it is not really all that close.
And the Obama administration provided that lab with funding.
Overall it is a good thing if the Chinese are doing research.
Further we would expect that standards will be lower in China.
The big response – whether this was the wet market or the lab or some other source is that China covered this up for a long time.
We are currently fairly certain that the first case was mid November at the latest, and may have been as early as late september.
I am told that cats in particular are highly susceptable to many human diseases.
Digs too can get human diseases, but that is less frequent.
Tigers are cats.
Thanks, Ron. I’ve got dogs…hope they don’t come up with a bunch of stories about them testing positive. I see that they recommend against going to dog parks. Around here, the dog parks have been shut down for weeks, although I think it has more to do with the owners not social distancing. I’ve always thought that dog parks tend to get filthy and gross, plus you never know whose dogs might not have their shots,etc.
In any case, now I’ve got my answer to the tiger question!
Covid19 is a mRNA virus, that should make it very prone to mutation.
But that is actually good rather than bad.
The odds are that the overwhelming majority of mutations will be failures – i.e. the virus will quit working.
Of successful mutations the odds are that the majority of these will be LESS virulent rather than more. Nature favors symbiosis over parasites and parasites over things that agressively kill their hosts.
The data that leaked out was from a study in China. There is newer data from US studies that is far more promising.
Absolutely in a perfect world we would have a huge double blind controlled study that would be definative. But we do not have that luxury.
Doctors are likely to try anything that meets the “first do no harm” principle, that has showed promise – even if only some of the time.
One of the big deals about HCQ is that because it has been used on billions of people it is easy to meet the first do no harm principle.
No antivirals are NOT harder than curing cancer. We have learned an enormous about about DNA, RNA, and the way these things work – as well as the way the modifiers and proteins in the human body work. Do we understand this perfectly yet ? No.
But we are far ahead of where we were 10, 20, 40 years ago.
Finding a drug that will kill the virus or otherwise weaken or slow it is easy.
One way this does resemble fighting cancer is that you have to thwart the virus without killing the patient.
There are already dozens of EXISTING drugs that have been identified that screw up Covid19 in vitro. That includes remedsivir and HCQ. But they have to work in vivo to be useful. The big deal about EXISTING – is that short circuits the FDA. If we have to find a new drug that works – that will take longer than a vaccine – partly because of the FDA, partly because we really do need to test things first.
We particularly now understand an enormous amount about proteins – they are machines and there actions are modified by hormones, and other modifiers in the body.
And we understand how this works in ways we just did not 40 years ago.
We are at the beginings of the road to Dr. McCoy concocting a treatment in his lab in a few days and administering it to the crew with a hypospray.
We will get there much faster if the government stays out of the way.
The so called “Spike” protein is a big deal – that is not the only way to thwart this, but it is the most obvious. There are even two different approaches – the one is to block the ACE2 receptor that the Spike acts as a key to unlock the cell. The other is to actually open it, causing multiple viruses to attack the same cell nearly concurrently overwhelming that cell, and killing it before the virus can start reproducing.
targeting the Spike Protein and the ACE2 receptors is just the easiest to understand means of thwarting this. There are numerous steps that the Virus must go through to successfully reproduce, alter any one of these and you can stop or slow the disease.
Nor is this all that difficult. The human body does it all the time with all kinds of diseases.
Most of us are NOT killed by Covid19. the human body does exactly what biologists are looking to do all the time in most people – it learns how to stop the virus, and kill it.
All of this is hard work. But it is not impossible. It is not as hard as cancer.
If Covid19 is a “turning point” it will not because there is a sudden jump in our knowledge.
It will be because we have pushed out of the way the 10 years of obstacles the FDA throws in the path of new treatments, because of “the crisis”.
Why is it so variable ?
All viruses, all diseases are variable.
I can not think of any known virus that results in a 100% infection rate, or even a 50% rate.
we do not understand that.
As to Covid19, we can already model the probability of a mild vs. severe case very accurately.
Age, health, and other similar factors are excellent predictors of how bad a case you will get if you are infected. They do not predict perfectly.
We have had almost no deaths in healthy young people under 40, but almost is not NONE.
One of the stupidities of the current public response is that we already know that 50+% of people who get this will likely not even know it, and of the rest 50% will get a mild flu or cold.
The portion of the population this poses a severe threat to is small. it is much easier to protect them than to lock down the country.
This is what happens when anyone associated with the democrat party goes off their reservation and tries to work for the best of the country.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/detroit-dems-to-censure-state-lawmaker-who-thanked-trump-for-touting-chloroquine/
Heaven forbid anyone considered a Democrat to give Trump a complement!
And I want you to pay close attention to the comment about Cuomo. When was he made god in New York?
Please lock up the cleaning supplies.
https://www.breitbart.com/health/2020/04/24/lysol-says-dont-inject-disinfectants-after-trump-remarks/
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQBdM2fpAk1QgQnpvS8wKfbMTpVzfQ4FJnt4EMDm2Ux9PxM97CV_O8I9nhi
Jay, your candidate needs to go back to school and learn about the constitution. And he wants to be president?😳
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/04/24/biden-predicts-trump-will-try-to-cancel-the-election-collude-with-russia/#30f235f958be
Trump is out Jan 2021 unless he is re-elected in November. Constitution succession take over. Every house member is out until states follow state rules for replacing them. Every senator up for reelection is out until state rules are followed to replace them. Only those in office inauguration day are in the line of succession.
Trump can not cancel election and stay in office.
And what are you going to do if he tries to keep power?
Bitch and moan it’s the Dems fault for not being more assertive?
“And what are you going to do if he tries to keep power?
Bitch and moan it’s the Dems fault for not being more assertive? ”
Not gona worry about it. Constitution! Already precedent set years ago by SCOTUS during martial law. He would be out Jan 2021. Look it up.
It is not going to happen.
This is a totally idiotic claim.
What are you going to do if Trump grows a horn in the middle of his head ?
Or peels back his hair to show “666” tattoo’d on his scalp ?
Why should the rest of us have to answer an idiotic hypothethical ?
Unless he is re-elected Trump will not be president on Jan 20, 2021 at 12:01
I am not going to have to do anything – it will just happen that way.
At that time he will be escorted by the secret Service to Marine one and taken wherever he wants to go.
In the mean time I will be opposed to ANYONE trying to fork with the 2020 election – and that includes Pelosi.
No mass fraud by mail-in ballot, no bazzilion days of early voting, no ballot harvesting.
I doubt we will face anything consequential from Covid19 by then. If this continues that long we will all be immune.
Regardless, if we have to we can social distance as we vote. We can take disinfectant wipes with us.
And if you are too anxious to vote – so be it.
I get really tired of this nonsense.
This is not russia, it is not Venezuela.
Lets pretend Trump would even try.
How is that going to happen ?
The states and congress control elections. Is Pelosi going to agree to suspend the election ?
Is SCOTUS going to uphold an executive order ?
Are governor’s going to follow it ?
Is the police and military going to enforce it ?
I am hard pressed to think of any time ever when any elected official in the US at any office successfully held on to power after they lost an ellection or was able to stop an election from occuring.
We have had idiotic permutations of this from the moment Trump was elected.
Ranting idiotically about the impossible is just lunacy.
There will be an election in Nov. PERIOD.
If Trump does not win it, On Jan 20, 2021, his Secret service agents will escort him to Marine one and take him wherever he wants to go. The Whitehouse staff will over the course of a few hours move all his possessions out and those of the next president in.
There is nothing Trump or anyone else can do to stop that.
The moment the new president is sworn in – no one will listen to orders given by Ex-President Trump. The moment he loses the election no one will allow him to interfere in the transition of power.
In all US history the ONLY president that has EVER done anything even close to sabotaging his successor is Barack Obama.
I know 100% of what you wrote.
I was only pointing out
that if he could,
buy any way,
which he can’t,
but lets say he could,
delay the election,
the constitution kicks in and the law of the land has to be followed.
I was explaining that to anyone who did not know, that as of Jan 21, 2021, Trump is out if he happened to be lucky enough to find a flea hole in the various laws that allowed him to delay it.
That is all I was writing about.
The only reason we are discussing this is because the left is nuts.
Tomorow we will be told Trump is going to disband congress.
Democrats have been pushing this “Trump will cancel the election” nonsense for 3 years…long before the coronavirus.
Using the Democrat projection theory, it is probably because they think that it’s a pretty good idea.
Doubt that “canceling the election” would be possible for either party,though. Postponing would be the only option, and even then, would likely cause such a massively negative reaction that the incumbent would lose in a landslide.
And wasn’t it the Dems in Wisconsin that wanted to postpone a special election (that they ultimately won), a few weeks ago, and the GOP wouldn’t allow it?
And I guarantee whatever ersatz reasons he’ll offer to hinder our cherished constitutional election guarantees you’ll go along with him. You’ll find persuasive logic in his dictatorial power grab. Yes you will.
“And I guarantee whatever ersatz reasons he’ll offer to hinder our cherished constitutional election guarantees you’ll go along with him. You’ll find persuasive logic in his dictatorial power grab. Yes you will.”
Absolute total bullshit.
There will be a national election on the first Tuesday after Nov. 1.
No one is stopping that.
I do not think any president ever has even tried.
And none would succeed if they did.
This is lunatic nonsense from left wing nuts.
The only way Trump could succeed would be with the support of Congress – that includes a democratic house, and the supreme court, and the governors of 50 states.
That in theory could happen – say there was a nuclear war in October.
But it is not going to happen over Covid19.
It did not happen during the civil war.
Your engaged in tinfoil hat nonsense.
And you have delusional ideas about how government works.
We have in US history had ONE instance where as a result of a fluke because of changes in election law, something vaguely resembling this sort of happened.
President Polk’s term ending on March 3, 1849 at noon as perscribed by law.
Zachary Taylor was not sworn in until March 5, 1849 at noon.
During the interim the president pro tem of the senate was technically the president.
Trump’s term and his power ends at noon Jan. 20, 2021 unless he is re-elected.
Even if he is re-elected he MUST be sworn in again.
The end of his term is the end of his term. the president does not have the unilateral power to extend it. at 12:01 Jan 20, 2021 at that moment unless he is re-elected and sworn in again, by the cheif justice of the supreme court, not a single person in government will continue to take directions from him.
Jay, I really don’t mind you relexively calling me a Trump sycophant, no matter what, but the truth is that I am not, and my support for him and his administration would not survive any sort of unconstitutional power grab.
That said, I have seen no evidence of Trump making any unconstitutional power grabs thus far. Just as he never fired Mueller, when your side was constantly claiming that he would.
Given the events of the past 3 1/2 years, I would be far more likely to believe that the Democrats are planning some national crisis that might create emergency cause to delay the election, and then cry foul when it becomes necessary to do so.
If you’d like to present some actual evidence for Biden’s out-of-left-field accusation, we can discuss it. I’m sure you’ll be reasonable.
I would ask why is Biden making lunatic accusations ?
There are already way to many questions about his mental state.
He should not be making incredible claims.
But what is really scary is that such a large number of people are buying the tin foil hat ravings of someone whose marbles appear to be slipping.
dave I already addressed this in a previous comment, but will again.
He said it because he knows voters are so damn stupid in this country they will believe anything a politician says. I get stuff from “educated” people on Facebook and Twitter multiple times a day that I fact check and there is not one inkling of truth to them, but there are hundreds of comments about how bad those thing are and how (democrats/republican) should be ashamed, defeated, jailed, etc etc.
Stupidity elects government.
Most voters are not that stupid.
The only people who buy this nonsense are those who if they were in power would do it if they thought they could – those on the left.
I can not think of a historical instance where an elected leader who was not of the left, did not leave power when they lost an election.
All this type of comment does is make Biden look scarier – to me, and I think to ordinary voters.
There are only two possibilities I can see – you are so stupid (or demented) to beleive this,
or you beleive Trump would do this – because you would.
Most voters are stupid. Over 80% could not answer basic constitutional questions, alk ones naturalized citizens can answer. Even Biden does not know Trump cant continue as oresident unless reelected.
Ron, is the voter stupidity curve equally distributed between Dems & Repubs?
This poll (one of many with similar conclusions) may help answer:
https://psmag.com/news/trumps-appeal-to-the-cognitively-challenged
Yep, about 80% on both sides. I can elaborate on why if needed.
Study after study has demonstated that Republicans are about 1-2 IQ points below democrats.
The problem is that Libertarians tend to vote replublican about 60/40 and the sames studies find that Libertarians are about 20pts higher in IQ than democrats.
More than enough to make up the difference.
Jay Leno, and myriads of other comedians, and even PragerU have done a great job of poking fun at the stupidity and lack of knowledge of ordinary people.
They typically take a camera out on the streets and ask relatively simple questions like
Who was president during the civil war ?
Or what was the political party of the union ? The confederacy ?
They ask these questions typically on the streets in New York City or LA.
Where the people are 70% democrat or more.
If you wish to test the the ignorance of republicans you are going to have to leave the big cities.
I will bet you that the typical voter in the boonies,
knows the words to the 2nd amendment,
Knows the difference between an automatic and semi-automatic weapon.
Finally I would not doubt that Trump voters as a whole would do more poorly than those on the left.
that does not make those on the left better able to make decisions for all of us.
As Nassim Talib has noted – ALL PEOPLE make notoriously bad decisions when they do not have “skin in the game”.
There are myriads of other factors involved.
Support for socialism – even communism rises with the amount of education you have.
And yet the excrebal history of socialism, its failure – in theory and practice is one of the most well established political and economic truths we have.
You continue to tell me Trump is an idiot, a dolt, a moron, stupid – so stupid he is advising people to mainline bleach, yet Trump managed to take about 45M and turn it into almost $3B.
He has managed to succeed, in numerous different and disparate areas.
He has inarguably done better than you or I or most anyone we know. If he is stupid what does that say of us ? I think most of us here are better educated than he is.
Why are we not multibillionaires ? Or atleast multiple millionaires ?
You and several others here beleive in CAGW. I consider that to be an IQ test.
Anyone who beleives the world is headed to catastrophy on what is essentially a matter of faith is seriously lacking in intelligence – whatever their IQ.
Are you sure ? Does Biden even remember what bleach is ?
When did bleach enter the conversation?
Lysol is not bleach
Watch the actual clip.
The bad news for Trump supports is it is Strange.
trump claims it was sarcasm.
It does not sound like sarcasm to me.
But it also does not sound serious either.
Some have claimed he was baiting the press. I think that is possible. but if that is the case he did so badly, and he is not usually bad at “bear baiting”
The cancel the election claim is nonsense, at least so far. It’s political BS for energising the base. Thank God trump never does anything like that and his base never takes the bait and runs with it. Certainly never anyone here, right?
Ok, in the certainty that total denial will reign in response to my comment, it was fun to be here and talk about something real for a view days but now the site has reverted to the same old boring nonsense. Out of here. Beautiful day.
Roby, I sure won’t deny this. How did Trump get the nomination? Playing to emotions of those that don’t know politicians lie.
How often do you hear something of importance that comes out of a politicians mouth and think its true?
For me, very little and then I am checking anyway.
Why did Biden say this. He can’t be so dang stupid or senile now that he actually believed Trump could cancel the election is he? Did someone say something and because of his mental decline he actually believed it?
No, but he knows that 85% of supporters on the left are the same as 85% of the supporters on the right. They are so ignorant of the constitution that they will believe anything a politician says and will not take the time to verify the information.
Its just red meat to get their supporters tweeting and spreading false information far and wide.
We elect politicians based on lies, innuendo and false information. Few are elected on truth.
We are century’s away from the election.
Myriads of things could happen between now and then.
Covid19 could be forgotten or an inescapable part of our lives.
This is likely to trigger debates about running elections.
Democrats are going to push for long mail in ballots.
That is an incredibly stupid idea, and just about the most corrupt way we could run an election.
How are we going to stop “mickey mouse” from voting if we do not even compel him to show up somewhere where someone can atleast eyeball that they are a real person.
though there will be a fight over how to conduct the election.
This nonsense about Trump refusing to leave is idiocy.
What is it that you actually want to talk about ?
Crap about whatever purportedly stupid thing Trump said last or more claims that he is going to pull a maduro and not leave is not my idea of interesting.
Pick a topic ?
Even Drudge has awoken
(Read the label)
here is Trump’s actual comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHkzqejFKbM
You Still Don’t Get It-1:
When you’re president, on air, speaking to millions – you don’t run your mouth with nonsensical suppositions…
As I keep saying – go listen to the clip.
I do not know exactly what Trump meant.
I am pretty sure he was NOT being sarcastic.
I am pretty sure he was also not suggesting mainlining Bleach.
He specifically looks to Dr. Brix several times in the middle, and she is not shouting and frothing.
But finally and most importantly.
I know that you are fixated on what people say.
I am interested in what people do.
Trump’s words, and the presses and your criticism of them are of no consequence.
It does not matter how many times he baits you and how many times you take the bait and froth outrage at us all.
NO ONE CARES.
You say millions are listening – correct, to Trump, not to Chris Cuomo, or Rachel Madow, or Joy Behar.
Trump has defied convential wisdom. He has taken on those who buy ink by the truckload, and he has won. No one is listening to you.
Mostly people are not listening to Trump – though more so than the media or the left or you.
Mostly people are not paying attention to words, they are following actions.
And Trump wins that easily.
You Still Don’t Get It-2;
When you’re president, on air, speaking to millions – and you run your mouth with nonsensical suppositions…you don’t LIE about it:
“ Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump lied Friday when he said he was being “sarcastic” when he asked medical experts on Thursday to look into the possibility of injecting disinfectant as a treatment for the coronavirus.
Doctors and the company that makes Lysol and Dettol warned that injecting or ingesting disinfectants is dangerous. But when Trump was asked about the comments during a bill signing on Friday, he said, “I was asking a question sarcastically to reporters like you just to see what would happen.”
He then suggested he was talking about disinfectants that can safely be rubbed on people’s hands. And then he returned to the sarcasm explanation, saying it was “a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside.”
A reporter noted that he had asked his medical experts to look into it. Trump responded: “No, no, no, no — to look into whether or not sun and disinfectant on the hands, but whether or not sun can help us.”
Like Donnie, I bet you can’t distinguish the difference between sarcasm and pompous buffoonery…
You still do not get it.
No one is listening. Especially not to you. You burned your credibility and it is gone.
Most everyone is tired of this game – YOUR game. One you have been playing for decades.
Honestly outside of the those who already loathe Trump, most of us are paying no attention to what Trump says.
Ron is very critical of Trump’s remarks. He is sure they will result in Biden being elected and beleives that will be disaster.
But personally for himself, he is still assessing Trump by what he does, not what he says.
It is completely unclear in the actual remarks Trump was making what he was saying.
But YOU are certain that you know and that Trump was litterally advising people to mainline bleach.
I do not know what he was saying. But I do know what he was NOT saying.
What he was NOT saying was “mainline bleach”.
That is pretty obvious to anyone who listens to the clip without starting with the assumtion that Trump is insane.
We are also all tired of this idiotic “Trump lied” nonsense.
Saying something you do not like – is not a lie.
Saying something you do not understand – is not a lie.
When you accuse someone of lying – you flip the burden of proof.
It is on you, not them.
You do not seem to grasp that.
A lie is not a statement you do not like. It is not an error of fact or oppinion.
It is a deliberate misrepresentation.
Saying someone is lying when they are not – that is a lie.
No one cares what you claim anymore, and no one trusts you.
I do not think Trump was being sarcastic. Nor was he recomending mainlining bleach.
But Trump is constantly baiting you are reporters – and EVERYTIME you take the bait.
Most of us are capable of listening to the actual clip and even if we can not tell for certain was WAS being said, we can easily tell what was NOT being said.
And we can tell that your frothing outraged response has no relationship to what was said.
That those lacking discernment are those pompously blowing this up.
The only people listening to you are others with TDS.
Covid-19 is not nearly as scary as govt reaction to it. What I though was my brother-in-laws paranoia in buying multiple semi-automatic weapons over the past few years is not paranoia. Its reality.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/duncan-lemps-parents-threatened-with-jail-for-protesting-his-killing/?fbclid=IwAR0UBRO_wUDmK0UxzFGKxSNgicdcAhsZn6Aqt3kGZwc-AYs2m3iRycvFtYo
You really do not want to read https://www.amazon.com/dp/B011T7FR0K?tag=duckduckgo-brave-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1
This unfortunately happens all the time.
Nothing will come of it.
And yes, it makes the assorted militia groups sane.
There are no state and local law enforcement actions in the US EVER that require a SWAT team – yet nearly every state and local law enforcement unit in the country has one.
There are very very very few that would require a national SWAT team.
Yet the department of education has one.
The only people who EVER get into gun battles with the police are those who are mentally disturbed.
Actual “persons not to posess” are arested all the time – without swat teams.
I would be shocked in Mr. Lemp was a “person not to posses” – juvenile records almost never disqualify adult gun ownership.
But in this case there does not even appear to be evidence he had a gun.
Regardless, why are we sending SWAT teams out over this ?
So a an adult who MIGHT have had a Juvie record MIGHT have had a gun ?
So what ?
No one has alleged he was planning a mass shooting or a robbery or dealing drugs.
This is like the David Koresch and Randy Weaver crap. Except in this instance Mr. Lemp was not armed.
But he was MURDERED by law enforcement.
If Lemp was a drug dealer this was not justified.
Actual drug dealers do not confront the police with firearms – even if they have them – unless the police burst in unannouced.
Very very few actual criminals want a gun fight with the police.
How many times have you read of shootouts with the police ?
It is pretty much always some spouse abusing husband who has come home to try to kill everyone.
It is never burglars, or drug dealers.
Our police shoot people under rules that our military would noit be allowed to fire.
And our courts have blessed this.
We would be safer under martial law.
Bleachgate Humor
https://theweek.com/cartoons/910728/political-cartoon-trump-disinfectant-press-briefing-coronavirus
jay, cartoons are supposed to be funny.
This is not.
It is also not accurate. Listen to the clip.
You can get away with stretching the truth – if you succeed in humor.
But if your result is not funny – then it is just a graphical editorial posing as a cartoon.
And then I expect something more accurate.
‘’ cartoons are supposed to be funny.’
Political cartoons? Are you daft?
All cartoons.
If i did not care about “funny” I would read an editorial.
As is often said – “the left can not meme” – they are humorless.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the committed communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
~ Hannah Arendt
This is what I see in people who have fallen, once again, for a media lie, a false story that reaffirms their prexisting irrational hatred.
Trump asks whether there has been research looking at the use of ultra-violet light (there has), or the use of disinfects that could be injected ( it already exists in some cancer treatments, although a truly safe disinfectant has not yet been found), and the press claims that he has suggested that people chug bleach.
For people who actually believe this, the distinction between fact and fiction no longer exists.
Priscilla, he posited those questions at the same April 23 press briefing, when “William Bryan, who leads the science and technology directorate at the Department of Homeland Security, addressed the media about recent DHS research on how well the coronavirus survives on nonporous surfaces in heat, humidity and sunlight. Bryan said the “virus dies the quickest in the presence of direct sunlight” and also talked about the testing of disinfectants that quickly kill the virus on surfaces.”
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/the-white-house-spins-trumps-disinfectant-remarks/
Here you see your Leader’s mind at work: hearing disinfectants can kill a virus within minutes when applied to different SURFACES (like Lysol in a toilet bowl?) he asks Bryan wonders if that process can be modified for internal medical use.
It’s as if Cliff Calvin from Cheers had been elected President spouting whatever popped into his haphazard mind: “So Norm, I may not be a medical doctor, but if you soak your head in beer every night instead of guzzling it, you’ll only have to shave every other week.”
“Here you see your Leader’s mind at work: hearing disinfectants can kill a virus within minutes when applied to different SURFACES (like Lysol in a toilet bowl?) he asks Bryan wonders if that process can be modified for internal medical use.”
An amazingly astute and yet entirely self unaware observation.
Do you know what Chemo Therapy is ? What radiation therapy is ?
These are the use of lethal toxins to kill off something harmful in our bodies. They are really bad for us. But they are hopefully worse for what we seek to kill.
Arsenic and Mercury are STILL used (rarely) to treat some diseases – especially those that are resistant to less toxic treatments.
What exactly is wrong with asking – If we can kill this on surfaces with heat, and sunlight and disinfectant, does that tell us some way to kill it in the body ?
The french are exploring Nicotine as a means to kill Covid19.
Fundimatally ALL efforts to eradicate this are efforts to find some way to kill the virus while causing the LEAST harm to the person. In a perfect world zero harm.
But chemo therapy comes very close to killing the people who get it, while killing the cancer that is killing them.
I did watch the presser, Jay, and it was clear to me that Trump was posing a question that took the results of the research on surface contamination, and wondering out loud (that was his mistake) whether those results could somehow translate into research on the use of ultraviolet raditation and blood disinfectants.
Never once did he suggest or imply that people should ingest household cleaners.
Now, to be fair, Trump’s style of out-of-the-box brainstorming can often work well in a business setting, but in a public press conference, it might lead to confusion. I don’t know if the press was “confused” or just saw an opening to twist his meaning, but any person who took his question to mean that he wanted us to start ingesting Clorox and Lysol, is on the level of the guy who ate aquarium cleaner. You know… people who need the warning label “Do not iron this garment while wearing it”
Already we know that cancer researchers have actually used hydrogen peroxide in infusions. It has not been very successful, and many doctors think that it’s dangerous. But Trump had nothing to do with it.
Ultraviolet light resesearch looks promsing. Cedars-Sinai has been testing ways to put light in the body through vent tubes . And there is this, which is also controversial:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6122858/
Trump did not suggest it.
My point is, Trump may have been imprudent, even rash, to even bring up the idea. It is fair to suggest that he is a leader and an influencer, and he should shut up about things that he knows little or nothing about, rather than wonder out loud and give some people the wrong idea.
But to outright claim that he suggested drinking or mainlining bleach or Lysol is a fiction that has now been put out there, for the people who will believe anything that the media claims about Trump. The people that Hannah Arendt was talking about.
I found Trump’s remarks confusing.
I listened to them and it was clear that he had a back and forth with Brix that almost certainly involved things they talked with outside of the press conference – context that we did not have. I also felt like Trump has suing analogies unclearly.
What I DID NOT conclude from listening to him was that he was suggesting that people should mainline bleach.
Those who are pushing that are either lying to themselves, or to others or both, or just drowning in TDS.
I would criticize Trump as you have for inarticulately musing publicly – especially in front of a hostile press.
I would also criticize him for the claim that his remarks were sarcastic.
Trump frequently baits the press – and they are incredibly easily baited.
But this was not one of those times.
After listening to the clip, I have no idea what Trump WAS talking about.
But I know that he WAS NOT talking about mainlining bleach.
I do not know what Trump really meant. I watched the clip several times.
do not think he was being sarcastic – which is what he now claims.
He is quite often sarcastic with the press – and they take the bait nearly 100% of the time usually to their own embarrasment. Because most of us recognize sarcasm.
As the Zito quote goes. The press take Trump literally but not seriously, his supporters take him seriously but not literally.
Regardless, I do not think this was sarcasm.
At the same time. It it is clear he was not literally recommending injecting bleach.
In the midst of the questioning he repeated asked Brix about what he was saying, and contra the press she was not screaming ‘NOOO!”. My guess is that she and Trump knew what he was talking about. But the press and the rest of us do not.
But in the end with very few exceptions I have learned not to give a damn about Trump’s remarks.
The left has spent 50 years engaged in this game of word twisting uproar.
Everyone who disagrees with the left is a nazi – the media repeats that, and even offers it themselves.
Trump BEGS them to double down on nonsense like that. The left, the press, Jay respond like pavlov’s dogs.
In the end what has happened is that these idiotic criticisms are more and more being ignored. It is a version of the boy who cried wolf. If you call Trump a moron 1,000 times a week, and nothing happens, people quit listening.
I continually remind everyone that I judge Trump primarily by what he does.
I do not agree with all of that. I can list many many areas I disagree with Trump.
But the net is still that he has done better as president than Bush and Obama.
That does not stop me from criticising what he has done wrong.
But despite all the outrage, Trump has actually been a fairly tame president.
For the first time since Ford, the US has not started a new conflict during a presidency.
Pre-Corona the economy was improving, wages were improving.
There were no massively expensive transform society plans.
The tax reform though quite imperfect was a dramatic improvement over what preceded it.
In terms of acts Trump is far outside my narrow reading of the constitution.
But AGAIN his breaches are quite tame compared to modern presidents.
The most egregious thing he has done was using emergency powers to fund the wall.
I think he should have stuck to his guns and accomplished that politically.
But looking backward that looks tame.
The border and immigration were supposed to be huge election issues.
Corona has take from Trump the crown jewels of a strong economy, but it has also made a previously minor argument for border security into a huge one.
There is still a long time before the election, and things could change, but right now, all the things we thought were important aren’t.
At this moment it appears the election will be about Covid19. it will be about Trump, it will be about democrats and republicans, and governors.
Further it is not mostly about Covid19 NOW, it will be about where we are in 2 months, 4 months. 6 months.
What it will not be about is Trump’s spats with the media.
Interesting. From what I read she is worse than her brother, but smarter.
https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/25/north-korea-dictator-kim-jong-un-dead-dies-heart-surgery-reports/
I do not know.
I do not care alot.
I think the writing is on the wall that NK needs to come to terms with the rest of the world
I do not think changing leaders will alter that.
Aside from this speculation abotu Kim Un we also know nothing about Covid19 in NK – except that NK is lying.
TMZ?
No other media reporting this…
Yes, “absentee” ballots is being pushed in N.C. also.
I commented on a site promoting this that if people had to go out and get cars inspected risking infection so they could renew car registrations, then there is no reason why walk in voting should not be required in N.C.
But they need to be careful. How many older people more inclined to vote GOP may not vote if there is a continuing virus, but will mail-in.?
I do not care what the political effect is.
The vote first and foremost must be trust worthy.
We must know that those who voted really were legitimate voters.
I do not have problems with voting being very difficult.
It could rain cats and dogs all day in California and lots of people could choose not to vote.
That is OK.
I have zero problems with the rules necescary to prevent even the appearance of corruption resulting in fewer votes.
I do not care if they reduce the number of voters in ways that appear to favor republicans or democrats.
I do not fundimentally have problems with absentee ballots – so long as those are done in a way that assures there is no fraud.
I voted absentee in 2018.
I had to go to the courthouse.
I had to present government issued photo ID.
I was given a ballot, I filled it out ALONE.
I sealed it in an envolope – with witnesses present.
I then sealed that envolope in another envolope that I had to sign swearing that was my vote and that no one had tampered with it.
The two envolopes are done to assure that my ballot is still PRIVATE.
On election day County election workers will take all the absenbtee ballots
Verify the signatures against voting records, unseal the outer envolope placing the innner envelope with hundreds of other absentee ballots.
Someone else then unseals each of those and runs it through a scanner that records the vote – just as if I did so personally.
I am sure there are ways of gaming this. But it is pretty hard.
Mail in ballots are trivial to game.
https://nypost.com/2020/04/25/north-korean-dictator-kim-jong-un-rumored-to-be-dead/
Jay, I saw that on Twitter, Mark Cuban, who serves on the President’s “re-opening committee, is suggesting that all stores that want to, should open now, for “take-out” orders.
I remember that we used to go back and forth over Cuban in 2016, but I think that this is a decent idea. It has its problems ~ if a clothing or shoe store wants to open up for curbside pickup, that’s great, but how will they handle returns, particularly since customers won’t be able to try things on until after they’ve purchased them. Also, how much are they actually going to sell this way?
I see it as perhaps a good transition to a full walk-in opening. But at least Cuban is willing to start the conversation on how a retail business might survive until Phase 2. Although I think that restaurants have been going out of business, even while selling take out. It’s just not enough volume.
I agree.. we need to start transitioning back to normal… but with masks and other preventative distancing still in place. If anyone else but Divisive Donnie was President we’d be well on our way to consensus on that.
What part of Trump is a divisive fuck-head hasn’t sunk in? If J. bush or some other moderate non-confrontational lying lump of crap Republican was President we wouldn’t be seeing the same level of bi-partisan hatred we have now.
“If anyone else but Divisive Donnie was President we’d be well on our way to consensus on that. ”
Jay, I disagree. We were just as divided with Obama, but you were living in ignorant bliss and was unaware because Obama did no wrong in your mind. So you ignored what B.O. did all while the right was basically going through ODS much like you are with TDS. I can only imagine the apoplectic response you would have if Brian Terry was killed now under the same conditions leadingto his death.
The divisions in this country are philosophical, resulting in political choices. No longer will we see “Reagan Democrats” that voted democrat for years, but accepted his policies. Biden will insure that does not happen when he picks a V.P., most likely a black ultra liberal woman. When the philosophy of the parties move so far from the center moderates, division is accelerated. elected
And when Biden is elected, please begin listening to conservative news programming to follow the BDS that will develop well before he takes office. Especially if Shumer is also majority leader. and Thomas leave SCOTUS soon.
And remember “Dumb Donnie” has nothing to sat about reopening. That is all governors. But if many are like me, another week – two weeks and I will be saying piss on this, my lifespan using social security tables found on the internet is 13 months. I am not spending 1/4 of that locked up!
There are differences regarding our divisions. Though the differences are NOT between Obama and Trump.
Conservatives, republicans, libertarians are at odds with each other, the president, others over policies, principles and values.
Those on the left are at odds with everyone else over emotions, getting their own way and animosity and hatred towards anyone who disagrees.
We were bitterly divided over Obama. But very few attacked Obama personally.
We fought over policies values and principles.
Conversely when the left does not get their way, they attack the person, ‘
Day in, Day out, there is very little debate over Trump’s policies.
And what little of that there is, is between Ron, and I, and Priscilla, and in the greater world it is between republicans and conservatives and libertarians with differing views.
What we get every day is the latest faux outrage.
There are many things Trump has done I do not agree with.
But I do not presume that because I disagree with him or with Ron who is closer to Trump on policy, though more bothered by Trump’s rhetoric, that it is acceptable to call Trump, or Ron, or anyone who does not agree with me on whatever I disagree with Trump, a racist, hateful, hating hater.
That is the difference today. That is what bitterly divides us.
It is not new, To the extent that it is worse with Trump, it is because he does not roll over and left the left calling him whatever names they wish. He goes right back at them.
Nor is there any debate “who started this”.
Every Republican president since Eisenhower has been called a nazi, probably every republican politician.
Your blaming Trump ?
Because democrat governors will not do something smart ?
Trump has nothing to do with the lockdown.
That is the sole responsibility of governors.
Nor is this a “consensus” issue. All that needs to happen is govenors need to rescind lockdown orders.
Jay, you would blame Trump if you did not win the lottery.
If you or anyone else is so full of hatred that you will not make the right choices because Trump is president – the problem is with YOU.
Sheesh, Jay, have you become incapable of having a freaking discussion about ANYTHING?
I brought up Mark Cuban a) because he has been on social media, trying to get ideas from people, regarding opening up the economy and beginning to get us out of this quarantine ~ which has accomplished its original purpose of “flattening the curve,” but now threatens to flatten the country, and b) you used to be a fan of Cuban’s. I thought it was because you liked his ideas and his outspokenness, but I’m seeing now that it was merely because he turned against Trump in the 2016 election.
Pull back for a second, if you can, and read my original comment, which had to do with opening retail stores right away for curbside pickup. Any thoughts on that. Trump has not said anything about it so far, so he shouldn’t be part of the conversation.
Do you think that it’s possible to discuss a specific issue, without making that issue about Trump?
Jay, I agree with you 110% about trump. Actually, so does Ron about trump the person. But Priscilla has a point. The pattern here is that you post news that shows that trump is a jerk and and according to his own words an imbecile and then Dave and Priscilla then defend him. Its been done now for more than 4 years.
Look, you and I and Rick and Ron all agree more or less on trump the person and Dave and Priscilla have no idea almost why we feel that way and think we are weirdly misguided. Its never going to change. Can’t we just take that as read and move on to something other than personalities? As well, one group here is 100% allergic to the liberal/Democratic public personalities and one group is just as allergic to most truly conservative public personalities. Can’t we just take that as read and move on? The reason being that we all know who thinks what and beating that to death is divisive. Yes trump is divisive cubed, but falling into the pattern of seeing everything from the stale partisan perspective, that helps? It doesn’t, it just continues on the micro scale what trump is so talented at on the mega scale.
I managed to have a sensible conversation with Dave (and Ron, but I can always have a sensible conversation with Ron) for a few days by sticking to the issues of COVID and leaving politics and trump out.
COVID ought not to be political, there should not be left wing science and right wing science and while economics is inherently divided into conservative and liberal types (and the GOP has discovered the virtues of Keynes in this mess) we ought to all be able to agree that the damage to the economy and in particular small businesses has been terrible and the whole issue is balancing somehow safety against the terrible harms of being in a depression when we have got the death rate under control.
To make an offering of a discussion topic that is Not about obnoxious political personalities here is an idea that may or may not be controversial: I say that the US government should make all the small businesses whole when this is over, no one should lose their shirt over COVID. We (the US Government) can borrow and should do so to protect businesses as we protect life. Some businesses that were failing anyhow will get a lucky gift. I’d rather err in that direction than have any hardworking business owners flattened. It would be great if such a Bill were scrutinized very well so that it does not contain any obvious gifts to the undeserving that could have been caught with a better reading. And woe unto any politician who slips that in and gets caught clearly helping those who are already in great shape.
Agree with all you wrote.
Notably good idea to get money to small and medium size businesses first. Infusions of Money to small businesses will quickly flow back into the economy. Whereas money to big business sectors like hotels and cruise ships that depend on bookings to create revenue are unlikely to result in positive economic benefits, short term or long. And those billions of dollars pouring into the corporate business yap? Who knows where that’s going to end up, aside from higher executive retirement packages and company stock buybacks (cynical smile).
You guys really beleive in magic.
When EVER has government effectively provided aid to small businesses ?
I have multiple small businesses. The good news is, they will all survive this. I have even been working on starting a new one in the midst of this.
But I do not expect to get a dime of govenrment aide to my business.
Nor would I want it. At the bare minimum it is too much work for most small businesses just to get government aide. And if it is not too much work – then the majority of the funds will be redirected corruptly.
I have no employees in any of my businesses – at this time. So any of the loans offered thus far would not be forgiveable. But I do have several people who work for me. They are paid for what they accomplish not the hours they work. there was nothing to do, so they did not get paid. I am down 20K in revenue for just one business. But because there was no work, there were no expenses either. So I am not “hurting” but I still lose money.
I am also very concerned about may rents. My tenants all paid in April – or atleast all the tenants I expected to pay. But if I do not get the same rents in may I will not be able to pay my mortgage, my taxes, my utilities, …. and I have big tax bills coming soon.
And right now my tenants have no incentive to pay. The courts are closed. Even if there were no moratorium on evictions, I can not evict.
Further even when the courts re-open – my tenants are judgement proof – they will never make up lost rents. I must either forgive their rent or evict them, they will never catchup.
And I do not expect government will make me whole.
As I have said repeatedly
LIFE IS NOT FAIR. Nor can government make it fair.
Bad things happen – even to good people.
You are making a mistake.
If you do this you create huge moral hazard.
You send the message that government is your parents, it is their to save you when you screw up.
There will be no end to government bailouts.
Further people will behave less responsibly – because government is their backstop.
Businesses fail, the people who start businesses go bankrupt sometimes,
Then they do it again.
Trump went bankrupt and recovered. That is how things work.
It is not perfect, but nothing you propose will work as well.
Roby, good comments! However I take issue with your comment “As well, one group here is 100% allergic to the liberal/Democratic public personalities and one group is just as allergic to most truly conservative public personalities.”
I have no problem with Democratic personalities. What I am allergic to is liberal policies. There are still some democrats that have sane policies, ones like Sharrod Brown with a Medicare buy-in or Joe Manchin with sensible environmental policies as well as moderate fiscal policies.
But what I object to mostly is hypocritical democrats. How many states, like N.C. ,have a democrat governor that has closed all the small businesses, but let big box stores stay open? Why can Costco sell clothing, but a local shop who could better control risk in stores with much fewer customers have to close? Why can Lowes stay open, but the small hardware store has to close?
Liberals in N.C.have supported this since day one in N.C. I have not since they only did it since corporations fund their campaigns, but Pops running a small hardware store is about to lose everything.
Why did the Pelosi allow a bill that requires businesses to use big banks for an SBA loan, when anyone in her position knows full well small businesses have relationships with small community banks. They dud it to support financial supporters.
We all know conservatives are in bed with big business. So are liberals, they just lie that they are not.
Neither brown nor manchin’s policies are sane.
But they are atleast things that can be discussed as policies.
It is distrubing that medicare buyin sound rational. It is a quite stupid idea.
Only less stupid that everything else proposed in the democratic debates.
We need LESS government, not more.
If you wish to make healthcare more expensive still – involve govenrment even more.
“We need LESS government, not more.”
Dave you have been saying this for years. How’s that working out for you?
I know that is what we need, but I am living in reality and know it won’t happen. Trump got rid of a tiny bit, but not enough.
So I know that PPACA is not going to go away. I know that states are not going to give up controlling insurance within their borders, so instead of insurance companies having one national plan to spread risk across millions, they have to have 50 different plans, even though they might be duplicates. The risk is still spread only in that one state or one employer.
So I look t the landscape and I believe we will have some national insurance plan when the democrats can push that through. So if I was involved in the selection of one national health plan, PPACA that forces people to buy into a private companies product or be fined, thus driving up corporate profits, or allowing people to buy into Medicare at the competitive rates private insurance sells for, my preference is medicare buy-in, with the PPACA subsidies now in place being used to fund those buying into Medicare that are lower income.
Now I understand all your positions about competition, government can’t do it efficiently, government needs to get out of it…etc, etc. That is never going to happen. So please don’t write a dissertation that I won’t read because I know your thinking.
This whole insurance mess has been created because private insurance screwed people that used their services. As long as insurance can sell insurance and no one uses it, they are happy and keep selling it. Let someone get cancer or heart disease and they find way to cancel first chance. And don’t even think about insurance for a baby born with some health problems because they will find every loophole in the contract to avoid that one.
So I want a plan that people can buy, they can afford and it won’t be cancelled. I also do not want someone forced to buy insurance if they choose not to. That is where medicare buy-in comes in. And if it is a better option, then the insurance companies will have to change to survive or more people will opt for MBI.
And when you have Senators like Sharrod promoting it, that is a moderate position. And Manchin has always rubbed the democrats the wrong way.
Bad ideas do not become good, just because it is probable they will be implimented.
That of course presumes they are probable.
I actually think there is a snowballs chance in hell of M4A or any of this other nonsense.
Republicans did not kill PPACA but they have sliced and diced it, and there is almost nothing left of it but the initials – and too much budgeted federal money.
Yes, Democrats think healthcare is a winning issue politically – while I am not sure they are right. Still the point for democrats is to use it to win elections – not actually DO IT.
And yes, that makes “moderates” like Manchin and Brown dangerous.
Because nothing the democratic leaders are selling is going to happen.
But in the event that it actually did, it would fail quickly and catastrophically and end the debate.
I think Democrats learned something from the PPACA debacle – advocating for something is politically beneficial – actually doing it is disasterous.
Do you have the slightest doubt that every GOP success from 2009 forward was the direct consequence of Democrats actually going forward with PPACA ?
Even Trump’s victory was atleast in part due to PPACA.
Yes, I would much rather have democrats selling snake oil that is not going to happen
Than something more palatable that could happen, would be bad, but might not be so bad as to self destruct.
Regardless, if you want to reduce medical costs (or pretty much anything else), GET GOVERNMENT OUT.
That is a tautology.
You are right few are listening to me.
And the consequence is medial costs will continue to rise faster than most anything else.
Until people do listen.
I am OK with that.
Sometimes we learn through logic and good argument.
Sometimes through failure.
It is still learning.
Dave, like I said your thinking has as much chance of becoming reality as Vermon Supreme has of becoming president. Small government is fiction.
I would greatly prefer to discuss issues than people.
Trump is a jerk. That is not something new. But he is far from the only jerk in the world.
Like Ron I would prefer not to have a jerk as a president.
I would also prefer not to have a rapist, But we have done that already, and might be preparing to do it again.
I would prefer a president whose commitments I can trust.
I am hard pressed to think of a president in US history who has done a better job keeping his campaign promises than Trump. Even ones I wish he would not have.
You say that I “defend Trump” – where appropriate.
Everything he says is not “defensible”
But there is a difference between I wish he was more articulate and some remark he has made is the “last straw”. Most people have gotten used to Trump’s rhetoric. They do not care. You might persuade them to “hate Trump” because of what he says – but they are still going to vote for or against because of what he does not what he says.
Further lots of us are extremely tied of the personal attacks – and those did not start with Trump. That has been the MO of the left for my entire life. But it has gotten worse.
Everyone the left disagrees with, AND everyone the media disagrees with everyone Jay disagree’s with is a racist, hateful hating hater.
We now have an army defending Mitt Romney – because he has gone after Trump.
This is the same Romney who purportedly was deliberately allowing people to die of cancer, was a racist, mysoginst, a dog abuser, When he was running against Obama.
Romney has not changed. But the people who suddenly see him as a hero are hypocrits.
If everyone is a Nazi – no one is a Nazi. If everyone is a racist, no one is a racist.
The left normalized Trump’s conduct, long before Trump entered politics.
Robby,
I understand as well as another person can what offends you about Trump’s speech.
What I do not understand is why your standards are one sided.
Here is Krystal Ball, no friend of Trump, talking about how she is being “canceled” because she said something less than completely obnoxious about Tucker Carlson.
And apparently Tulsi is no longer a Russian Agent since she endorsed Biden.
The left – the MSM is far more nuts than Trump.
They have been that way for a long time.
And they not Trump are a more serious threat to the country.
“I say that the US government should make all the small businesses whole when this is over, no one should lose their shirt over COVID. ”
As a sentiment I have no problem with that.
In practice it is not possible.
We have produced less for the past month. Less food, less of all kinds of things.
There is no fixing that.
Absent goods and services produced money is just little green slips of paper.
Government can (and is) printing trillions of them. But it does not really change much.
Goods and services were not produced. Nothing fixes that.
There are complexities to monetary policy – the government can get away with dumping a couple of Trillion into a stalled economy – but once it starts moving again, that money mush be removed or it turns into inflation. that same would be true of “making people whole”.
When government injects money into the economy – nothing additional was produced there is just more money chasing the same goods and services.
In the midst of an actual recession – that is not inherently inflationary – because the velocity of money declines so there APPEARS to be less total money, but once the economy restarts, that money must either be removed or you get inflation.
Next where does that money come from ?
There are only 3 choices:
Government can just print it and never bother with taxes or borrowing. In which case ultimately that money is inflationary, and that is a tax on everyone. And a very regressive tax.
Government can borrow. We are over 100% of GDP in borrowing. The US is uniquely situated as the reserve currency of the world, so the pressure to behave responsibily on us is not as intense as say greece. But ultimately increasing the scale of US borrowing relative to GDP is probably unsustainable, and definitely a drag on GDP. All of what government has borrowed would have been an actual investment and would have meant a higher standard of living had govenrment never borrowed it.
The last choice is to tax. That is going to be really popular.
But in all cases the cost of the money you are giving away in one form or another is born by all of us.
Small businesses were hurt. And we can all “feel” they should be made whole.
But so was most everyone else, and making small businesses whole comes at the expense of others who were hurt too.
Most of us here on this blog were NOT hurt. About 1/3 of the country was able to effectively continue much of their lives, and their work from home. That is not actually sustainable very long. If we do not restart the economy soon, the people so far untouched will start to get harmed too. about 1/3 of the country was laid off, and some of them are not getting jobs back fast.
Regardless, if you want to make small businesses whole you have to take that cost from somewhere.
And there is nowhere.
What is borrowed must be paid back.
When it is paid back that is either from more borrowing, printing money or raising taxes.
There is no magic wand.
We have already given away something like 2.3T.
Do you really beleive that was distributed wisely ?
That there was no corruption involved ?
That it got into the hands of those who needed it ?
BTW that 2.3T – that is about the GDP of one month.
Ignoring the fact that we wroduces about 60% of normal during that month
if as you claim government had been able to direct that were is was needed
there would be no businesses going under.
The fact is you are asking for something out of govenrment that it just can not do.
If government was able to do what you propose – socialism would actually work.
That is not a facetious statement. It is a statement of truth.
If government had the skills to do what you propose than it would also have the skills to directly manage the economy. We know from history that it does not.
You can wish for government to wisely direct whatever aide it provides efficiently and effectively, but that is not something government has ever been able to do.
Ron: “We were just as divided with Obama, but you were living in ignorant bliss and was unaware because Obama did no wrong in your mind.”
Nonsense. I was an anti-PC Obama critic for most of his tenure. Back then, as now, I focus on picking fights with dumb-asses at both political extremes. But direct the majority of venom at the current party in power.
I do not recall you as an Obama cheerleader, but I think your view of your past is rose tinted.
Regardless, your own remarks are telling.
Criticse the current administration – great.
But directing venom is something different.
You did not direct venom at Obama. Almost no one did.
You do not direct venom at the current administration.
You direct venom at Trump and anyone who will not join you in directing venom at him.
That is not criticism. And that is what is wrong today.
Ron, I was tempted to write, and probably should have, that one group here is strongly allergic to liberal political figures, one group is utterly allergic to conservative political figures and then there is Ron, who is allergic to political figures, period. I use as my evidence a conversation that once started with me saying that at one time I had (naively) respected Lindsey Graham and ended with you saying that anyone who respected any political figure is a fool. I will admit it has not been hard to believe that you are allergic to any liberal political figure who is under discussion, starting with Queen Nancy and continuing to Biden, a certain lack of love (or like) does come through your comments.
Outside that, your point about small businesses very often preferring to deal with small local banks is well taken and should be known to the pols.
Roby, thanks for putting me in “time out” by myself😂
I just want to remind you that there are conservatives I dislike just as much as the democrats you listed. For one, Ted Cruz. His form of government wants to regulate you in the same manner as the left, but just in different categories. Democrats want to force you to buy insurance. Ted Cruz conservatives want to force women to give birth.
And to remind everyone, I was a Marco Rubio voter, the Gary Johnson.
Ron’s point about small businesses and banks is known to the pols, and they do not care.
Are there differences between conservatives and progressive politicians ?
Absolutely – there are even meaningful differences.
Are the overwhelming majority untrustworthy regardless of party ? Absolutely.
And these are the people you wish to trust with economic recovery and your bailout program ?
Lindsey Graham is not wrong quite as often as Pelosi. But that is not a compliment.
Trump looks honest compared to the vast majority in Washington of either party.
I am not looking to drag this back to Trump.
But I am trying to point out that I MIGHT on many issues Inot all) beleive that conservatives are the lessor evil. But that does not make them good. I MIGHT trust them more than progressives. But that is not the same as actually trusting them.
One of the big problems we have today is that actual liberalism is dead.
The left in the 60’s was for FREEDOM. Today they are for oppression.
Poor choices all arround.
“Most people have gotten used to Trump’s rhetoric. They do not care. ”
You have no proof of that, more to the point, little supporting evidence, while there is very strong evidence to the contrary.
Prior to COVID for all of last year and the previous trump years we were not at war, even withdrawing our forces from many places, and we were enjoying a good economy. Yet trump was losing in most head to heads to all the Dem candidates including the repulsive and boring Bernie Sanders, a lunatic and a member of a Marxist-Leninist party in his middle years, a complete nut in other words, who is far outside the American tradition for POTUS candidates. That is a pretty strong statement of just how much most voters DO care about trump the person. That strongly suggests that people DO care about the things you think they don’t care about. If not for his words and behaviors he would be running away from any democrat. So, why do you fight about about a point that is so foolish? Concede defeat on this obvious point and move on.
I do not wish to discuss trump or other noxious personalities, we have done that too much here, we obsess about it. You say you do not want to do that either. So, on to better things I hope. I am sick of having every situation revolve around its impacts vis a vis trump’s prospects. He is just one (shitty) man how did he become the meaning of American life?
“You have no proof of that, more to the point, little supporting evidence, while there is very strong evidence to the contrary.”
There is ? While Covid has thrown off all political calculations just about every honest political analayst expected Trump to win in 2020. Almost no one expected Trump to win in 2016.
That is called proof that people have become more accepting of Trump.
Purportedly Biden is still polling ahead of Trump – barely. I think Hillary was ahead of Trump by almost 30pts at this time. Certainly not within the margin of error.
On April 20, 2012 Obama’s approval rating was 46%, on april 20, 2020 Trump’s is 45%.
The approval of democrats, republicans, congress, Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell, Schiff are all below Trump – most far below. The approval of the media is significantly below Trump.
Go follow the reporting of Salena Zito – not some Trump Psychophant. She is just a political reporter who could not get an election gig from any major media outlet in 2016 and so she went freelance on her own and decided to go look for something no one else was doing. So she went into flyover country and tried to see if anything was happening. And outside of the big cities she sat down with people and listened to them. And long before most anyone else, she understood something was going on, and that Trump might win.
She has continued the same beat since. And she is reporting on what has changed in Flyover country – these are the battleground states Trump must do well in to get relected.
So what has she found – a tiny portion of former Trump supporters are disillusioned with him.
But the majority of his supporters are not only happy, they are very happy. And alot more democrats in these states are leaning towards Trump. There are fights in Union halls in purportedly blue rust belts states – because the Union leadership is endorsing democrats, and the rank and file wants Trump.
Called this all be self delusion on her part or mine ?
Maybe, but she was right in 2016 – were you ?
I would further note RCP Betting Odds has Trump over Biden by 5pts.
It is a long long way to the election.
The other thing I would note that Zito has found – as have others. Most of Trump supporters in Rust Belt and fly over states do not pay attention to most of the 24hr news cycle about Trump. They do not know much about what Trump has said, but they know alot about what Trump has done and they are happy with that.
Wow some polls have Sanders beating Trump.
At this time in 2016 all polls had Clinton wiping the floor with Trump.
I do not know what the effect of Covid will be. The issue could completely fade in a couple of months. or it could be the determining factor in 2020 – either for or against Trump.
But at the moment it owns everything including the election.
My instincts assert that Trump can not survive the destruction of his economy.
But so far he has. I do not think Biden is even in the race anymore – this is now Trump vs. Covid.
I would also note that watch the news – it is now Trump vs. the entire democratic party.
And Trump has managed to make himself the champion of blue collar workers again. And more importantly he has managed to make democrats their enemy.
Pelosi is having designer ice cream from her 24K Fridges – I am sure that went over well with minorities and blue collar workers. Trump has gotten himself into an interesting position where He can attack various Governor’s handling of Covid19 without having much actual responsibility. After being marginally held accountable at the start – he was responsible for the borders and that is HIS thing – but even that he has mostly turned arround – because Dems are just not credible on borders. But now he has successfully gotten the spotlight while at the same time having the actual responsibility fall with governors.
And he is mostly successfully blaming them for the bad economy and jobs loss and not caring about workers.
Many Red states are opening up. Even blue states are relaxing restrictions.
If this works out – Trump will be the big winner – not the governors, And Trump will be able to argue that we should have opened up sooner.
But if this fails Trump is mostly safe to blame the governors.
Further even failure – the failure Trump must prevent is Covid to go out of control in Rural and suburban areas and kill lots of people in those – that shows no sign of happening.
Covid19’s damage will be greatest in the long run in the cities, they will take the longest to recover. That is not a democrat republican thing, but it is a fact that democrats will be hit harder. NYC was hit pretty badly – but much of the country is wondering what it is we are all hiding from.
We are now seeing LOTS of antibody studies, and they are showing between 6-20% of the population already got this. Mortality rate calculations run from significantly less than the flu to 2-3 times higher NOT 20 times higher.
The adjustments that are sure to be made will favor Trump.
We do not know what will happen with the economy – but there is good reason to beleive that recovery will be fast – especially if we can end this soon. The longer it takes to re-open the harder the recovery will be.
Meat packing is nearly shut down. Ranchers have cattle ready for slaughter. There will come a point where they can not afford to feed them and they will just shoot them, and we can not recover from that for atleast a year. but until that occurs recovery could be a few weeks.
If there is a rapid recovery – Trump gets re-elected in a landslide – much bigger than anything I have predicted before.
If the recovery is drawn out – Trump is toast.
Whatever the recovery is Trump is already set to blame democratic governors for everything that goes wrong.
If you do not want to discus Trump – don’t.
It is pretty simple.
The issue was not “can trump possibly win?” I have always said that it is possible, in fact its an even bet and I still think so. No, your statement that I dispute was “Most people have gotten used to Trump’s rhetoric. They do not care.”
Why do I even care about this question? Its simple, because I care about trumps rhetoric and it would be a sad thing for me if people actually have accepted that the POTUS should behave and speak as trump does. Thankfully most people have not. My interest here is not actually directly in trump himself, its in the question of whether we as a country have now fallen to his level and accepted his rhetoric.
I’ll use Ron as an example and say that no, we have not as a country accepted trumps rhetoric, not even people who like his policies. And thank God for that.
Your words were just an extended “so what” of the fact that a year ago, before COVID existed, Bernie Sanders and all the Dem candidates were beating trump by good margins in most polls. Given the economic numbers and the fact that trump has ended military entanglements rather than starting them, he should have been miles ahead, not behind and consistently underwater for his entire presidency. I can add to that one more reason he should have been miles ahead: this country is still in my opinion tilted slightly to the right of center, it favors conservative leaning politicians.
Again, I say that trump may very well win. So, if so why isn’t he far ahead in the polls? Why is he never, never far ahead in the polls? You say most people don’t care. So you must have another explanation of why he is not killing it. (BTW he has been quite far down in Rasmussen of late) What is your explanation if not his rhetoric, his words his behaviors? Give me a plausible alternative theory.
Most people dislike him and don’t want him as POTUS. That is so strongly true that he got the smallest possible short bounce in popularity from the COVID crisis, a perhaps 6 point sympathy/solidarity swing, in other words 3% softened their dislike and temporarily supported him for unity and patriotic reasons and almost all of those few have since gone back and he is down 9 points again on 538, having never even reached neutral. No other president in my memory has faced a large national crisis without getting a large bounce.
Now, you can Oh Wow that all you want, but who are you kidding? (Oh wow BTW isn’t an argument). Oh well, If you want to close your eyes to reality and believe that few people care about trump’s rhetoric, his character and behavior, its no skin off my knees.
Arrg, this %^$#@ trump topic is as boring as it is irresistable. Bleh.
If you accept that Trump is probably going to win, you have also accepted my assertion that most people have gotten used to or ignoring Trump’s rhetoric.
When we vote we express our weighted overall preference. It would be even better if voting came at a real cost – if we had more “Skin in the game” which is why I want voting to be hard not easy. We have made poll tests illegal. We should have made them universal.
I do not want to stop minorities from voting – as has been noted immigrants know more about our constitution than citizens. I think to vote, you should know the “Bill of rights” the preamble to the declaration of independence. if congress and the president were answerable to an electorate that had actually read the constitution, our government would be quite different.
Regardless, my point is that if you beleive Trump is likely to be relected, then you have accepted that most voters do NOT care much about he rhetoric. If they did, they would not re-elect him.
I think that Trump’s rhetoric has done us all a great service. It has defanged this politics of personal destruction. As I said before – if everyone is a nazi, no one is a nazi.
Most everyone here bitches about the divisive politics.
But you miss the key point.
All that bitter divisiveness exists because it works. It will stop, only when it quits working.
Trump is making that happen. Only the press and the left are paying attention to Trump’s attacks on others. Only Trump the press and the left are paying attention to the attacks on Trump.
Trump has made it quit working, by doing to the left and the press what they do to everyone else.
And if the rhetoric was actually important – we would vote Trump out – in a landslide.
What is character ? Is it what you say or is it what you do ?
Roby be careful. “I’ll use Ron as an example and say that no, we have not as a country accepted trumps rhetoric, not even people who like his policies. And thank God for that.”
There is a huge number of people that are apolitical. More than anyone would want to know. Remeber only 55%-6-% of eligible voters vote and within that group, there are many who do not follow politics much. They just vote one party or the other becasue “thats the way its always been”
CNN and Biden and the left owe Kavanaugh a huge appology.
“Just as highly important information on antibody testing has started to come in, Governor JB Pritzker announced Friday that he will de-prioritize that testing. He is withholding results collected so far in Illinois.”
https://wirepoints.org/pritzker-now-stonewalling-critical-antibody-testing-wirepoints/
An interesting and fact based article on the move by the Governor of Illinois. It would be easy to say that Pritzker simply wants to justify expanding the shutdown, but the article also notes that antibody testing produces a lot of false positives.
More and more, my opinion is that excessive reliance on testing to determine whether states should open or not is not a good idea. The reality is, that as people begin going back to work and to their semi-normal lives, some people are going to catch the virus, some are going to die of it. Almost all states ~ even NJ, which, next to New York, has been the hardest hit ~have flattened the curve, and the likelihood of any hospital being overwhelmed with Covid cases between now and September is low.
So, it seems to me that putting too much emphasis on testing is just going to backfire, as states which rely on them, find them unreliable.
Thoughts?
There is lots of critiques of the antibody testing done so far.
False positives being a major complaint.
But the results accross the country AND the world are relatively consistent,
Somewhere between 4% and 16% of the population has antibodies.
that result comes from atleast a dozen differnet reports using multiple different tests, with different false positive rates.
The worst false positive rate I have heard of so far is 0.9% – is it really going to matter whether 3.1%-15.1% of the population has antibodies. And if the percent of false positives is as a percent of the positives, not a percent of the total tests – then the false positive rate is small. Further no one has discussed the false negative rate.
a 4% infection rate means that the IFR is off by a factor of 5. That makes this a really bad flu – no more. a 16% infection rate means this is LESS than the flu.
There is not an answer – even adjusting for “false positives” that does not mean we “over reacted” – and are still doing so.
“That makes this a really bad flu”
Really no, no NO. Very few sensible people are going to buy that cheerful nonsense. If you want to go by the notion that 1 death is a tragedy but 100,000 deaths are a statistic (to paraphrase you know who) then, well, still No. There is only so far that happy horseshit can go, you will find insufficient takers to form a movement and do anything.
See below, I think we need to open up a significant part of the economy sooner rather than later, but I am not going to base that on the happy idea that COVID is no big deal.
We will be very lucky to lose fewer than 100 000 Americans in the first wave of this at the present rate, and COVID also appears to do much more long term damage to the body than a flu. COVID is just a flu like an angry black leopard is just a cat.
Robby, and IFR in the vacinity of 0.2 is a bad flu. Really, Yes,
Next, todate Covid19 has killed 56K people in the US. that is a bad flu year.
I beleive the flu deaths for 2019-2020 through march are about 61K.
It it likely that Covid19 deaths in the US will exceed that before this is over – but not by a factor of 2 much less an order of magnitude.
The 1918 Flu killed atleast 600K in the US – that is 10 times worse, and considering the population was 1/3 that of today – that was 30 times worse.
Further the 1918 Flu did not hit the elderly and the frail, perversely it targeted those with the STRONGEST immune systems. It caused the same cytokine storms we are seeing – but in very healthy people.
I beleive you or Ron posted charts about “lockdowns” in 1918. In fact in 1918 they did NOT lockdown in the same way is we are doing. They did not shut down states. they placed restrictions on specific cities, and the restrictions were NARROWER than those today.
Next – did the lockdowns work ? What data we have so far strongly suggests they had no effect. There is global variability in the death rate, probably based on the quality of health care, the demographics of that countries people, and how well they measured the spread of the disease. But there is no evidence so far that the countries that engaged in sweeping lockdowns fared better than those who did not.
As we get more data MAYBE that will change. But the odds of anything changing enough to justify the lockdowns is zero.
Did social distancing work ? The data on that is more ambiguous, we need a better understanding of the infection rate, we need a better understanding of how this behaved in different areas. At the moment it appears that the effect of social distancing was small.
There is a nice video by 3Blue1Brown on youtube modeling different responses to an epidemic. While there are some false assumptions in that video, beyond that the modeling is good and the GENERAL conclusions are good, even if the specifics are not – there are very few epidemics that infect more than about 1/4 of the population. Herd immunity is usually large enough at that point to reduce the R0 below 1 and the virus dies.
Regardless the 3b1b videos do demonstrate the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of different approaches.
Actual quarantines Work. But you must be able to quarantine atleast 95% of infected people.
That is near certain not true of this.
Just about every other measure – merely delays the inevitable.
The “flattening the curve” approach – which is what we aimed for, is NOT to reduce total infections – that is a constant – the area under the curve is unchanged, curve just gets flatter and longer.
It MIGHT reduce the number of deaths – if and only iff it prevents the health care system from being overwhelmed.
The healthcare system in Wuhan was overwhelmed, in spain it was overwhelmed, in itally it was overwhelmed. Outside of spain and itally which have unique demographics and weak healthcare systems, nowhere else in the developed world did the healthcare system get overwhelmed. In the US we were at 1/3 of our normal capacity, and probably an order of magnitude from our surge capacity. Hospitals throughout the country were mostly empty – because we removed all the people who would normally be in them to make room for Covid19 patients.
We flattened the curve but it is near certain we had no effect on the total number of deaths.
We did so by locking down 330m people for 30 days and counting.
It will take a while to figure out what the actual net deaths were – car accidents dropped, but other deaths increased, While the Covid19 deaths were high it is likely that 10% of Covid19 deaths are actually the flu, People do die of the flu.
But one thing we do know – aside from the economic damage – we WASTED the approximate equivalent of 330K lives. that is the human cost of 330m people sitting at home twiddling their thumbs for 30 days. We can quible over the number, maybe it was only 40% of that,
and maybe it will only increase by 50% before we are done. But no matter what the impact of the lockdown has been enormous – economically and in other ways.
And the evidence that it was justified is not forthcoming.
“We will be very lucky to lose fewer than 100 000 Americans ”
Why ?
I do not want to hear about luck.
Our doctors and nurses and hospitals did a great job – kudos.
But it was not luck.
Can you identify ANYTHING else that there is clear and convincing evidence reduced the number of deaths ?
The comparative data across the US and accross the world shows only small variations between countries – and those differences are either demographic or based on the quality of the healthcare system. Show me evidence that anything else had an impact ? Changed the outcome.
Whether the number of deaths is 60K or 100K or …
There is nothing beyond those two items I mentioned that altered the number of deaths.
This is not about luck.
Frankly – if this had proved 10 times deadly – and 1M in the us died – it still would not be about luck.
If you want to thank god, or the stars or the governors or …. that fewer people died – provide the data that supports the claim.
If the antibody test has a 5% false positive rate (which is one rate I have heard for one maker) and it is taken and shows that 5% have antibodies, what does that actually prove? Actually, that hypothetical result is just an example that would support the idea that almost no one has been exposed. If it shows 10% that would be 5% true positive and 5% false positive, a 50% error rate. 50% of the positives testers would falsely believe they had at least some immunity. Given that there is dispute over whether people with antibodies are even immune what does it mean? Now when we get a 1% false positive test, and when a majority of people test positive it will mean something, but we would still have to know how much the presence of antibodies indicates that someone is not spreading the virus and has some immunity as well.
We are at an early stage of the acceleration of virology. Its going to be a long slow uphill fight science wise. If we wait for science to save us we will be waiting too long in terms of the economy. I look at the science on this as being very important now but also very important as a dress rehearsal for learning enough about fighting viruses to survive something even worse someday. COVID may be the small asteroid with the bigger asteroid off in the future. Not very cheerful am I?
Personally, I think we need to open a lot of things up in the economy in a matter of weeks to a month. Not everything, but the critical things and the food supply is tops on that list. In another 2 months nearly everyone is going to have joined the rebellion.
This social distancing period has given us a breather let us “reload” and strategise. We can’t hold our breath forever.
We also need to know the false negative rate
And we need to know what the false positive rate is relative to.
Total number of tests, or total number of positives.
The example I saw went something like 1000 people were tested, 100 tested positive and 5 of those were false positives.
What does it means ?
The presence of antibodies either means you got the disease, or you got something close enough to it to have antibodies that test as Covid19 antibodies.
If the number of people who got this is 5% the IFR is I beleive 2-3 times the Flu, If it is 15% then this may have a lower IFR than the flu.
It also is a reflection of how contagious this is. The larger the portion of the population that has it, the more likely everything we have done to stop it was futile.
It is also meaningfule regarding the models. As much criticism as is leveled at them – deservedly, they are close to all we have for prediction. Better information means better models.
I think there is little debate that people who get this are immune. The debate is how long the immunity lasts ? Weeks ? Months, Years ? Decades ?
There are multiple antibody tests being used. Atleast one that has been used more than once claims that it does not produce false positives. The maker of the one in FL claims the false positive spec is made up – that they really do not know, and that the test that claims no false positives is just lying.
Science does not proceed at a steady pace, it moves in fits and starts, stagnant and then making quantum leaps. There is good reason to beleive we are near the point of quantum leaps – particularly with respect to viruses. While we have known about DNA (and RNA) for 7 decades, our understanding of proteins has exploded just in the past few years.
We now recognize them as machines and are at the beginings of a deep understanding of how they work. That is a giant step and that knowlede is only within the past few years.
The big impediment in medicine – especially right now – and not just regarding viruses is the FDA. We developed a vaccine for Covid19 in 42 days, By less than double that we have 3 dozen. In a month we will have double that. There were vaccines in development for SARS and MERS but these stalled when the diseases were killed off.
The big impediment in medicine today is the time to convince government something is safe.
The chinese could have eradicated Covid19 if they had a vaccine in January – even if that was relatively risky. They would only have to had it administered to a couple of thousand people. That was beyond our technology at the time.
But the point is still valid – more risk is tolerable early on when the numbers are small.
More risk is also tolerable when you are in crisis. But government is very poor at dynamically adjusting constraints.
I would note that though the polio vaccine took time to develop – the science end, the deployment was rapid even by todays terms. We did not go through 10 years of testing first to develop a safety profile.
Covid may not be the straw that breaks the FDA’s back, but it certainly exposes that from WHO and CDC, and NIH through FDA we have a government health system that is an obstacle to what we need.
You say Covid is a warning of things to come – maybe.
It also may well be the last of its kind.
I do not know if HOQ or Remedsivir will be the magic bullet.
But I have read enough of the biology that is going on to know that in dozens of different ways biologists have the tools today to quickly find the silver bullet to thwart many viruses – if the incentives are high enough.
“Given enough brains, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the solution will be obvious to someone.”
“the Cathederal and the Bazzar” by Eric S. Raymond,
This is just a formulation of Julian Simon’s observation that standard of living rises faster the more people there are. That the only limited resource, that the ultimate resource is the human brain.
Covid19 has attracted the attention of an enormous number of brains, it is unlikely that anything has ever had so many eyeballs working on it at one time.
Further there is a very strong possibility that breakthroughs against Covid19 will be repeatable against myriads of other viral diseases – without the same level of effort.
The first time is always the hardest.
I have found it fascinating reading overviews of what is being done.
Atleast one lab is analyzing the RNA to determine where the weak points in the virus are and then looking for EXISTING and approved drugs that target the weak points they identify.
Within a few weeks they had 5, A week later they had 25 prospects.
Most of these efforts are going to fail. But only one needs to succeed.
What I see is that we have the brain power, the technology the expertise to likely beat this.
But not within todays medical development framework.
The problems from end to end have been government (and politics), not medical science
I do not think we are within 5 years of Dr. McCoy producing a hypospray to kill an alien virus in hours. But we are withing sight of that goal.
Social distancing and shutting down the economy are entirely independent approaches.
The daily new cases has plateaued globally, in the US and in Sweden That plateau has some small daily spikes but it it is 3 weeks long at least most everywhere.
That is despite completely different approaches.
Pretty much everyone has been recomending social distancing, but lots of the world has NOT locked down their economy – that does not mean the economy is not taking a hit – that is inevitiable. But so far the US pattern looks no different
Further inside the US states with no lockdown, limited lockdown or strict lockdown do not show distinctly different patterns.
So there is no real evidence that the draconian actions of government had any effect.
As to social distancing – the advice makes sense, it and other recomendations regarding dealing with the flu and cold are the best advice that we had.
But the jury is still out on whether it worked. The greater the portion of the population that has been infected, the less credible the claim that social distancing had any impact.
But we will likely ultimately find out. We can test the spread in areas where social distancing is naturally greater and those were it is not possible such as NYC
Anyway it is possible that by swift action we dodged a bullet. But it is highly improbably.
It is much more possible that we blew up our economy and took away peoples freedom for little or no benefit. to be clear the economy was taking a hit no matter what.
But that hit would have been smaller had government asked for voluntary rather than manadatory measures, and allowed people to be creative.
The more testing done increases the new daily case numbers in states like N.C. They say we are bending the curve but numbers do not show it. The last few days has had 25% more new cases than the average over the previous 3 weeks. That is not a good trend. The nujmber of cases might be decreasing, but government can use the published data to continue the lockdown.
You have to watch the numbers carefully.
When testing reveals alot of new cases – it goes in the day they are discovered, but within 24 hours they are redistributed to the date those people were actually infected.
A few days ago the US had the highest total new daily cases ever – for a few hours, then days as much as 7 days earlier increased a little and by the time it was worked out the trend was still flat.
Regardless, the number you should track is the deaths. While it lags by about 10 days, it is not jiggered by improved testing.
If the antibody numbers are even 10% correct – we have one hell of alot more cases than the confirmed case numbers indicate.
But that does not change the fact that we have plateaued
Dave, tell that to our governor.
Ron, I think that the global data not only shows that Lockdowns did not work, but that even social distancing did not work.
As I noted with Robby – the pattern of progression of this accross the world is almost identical from country to country.
There are only a few clear distinctions – those are:
Some countries stopped this at their borders (or very shortly thereafter).
There is some differences in techniques, between Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea as an example, Regardless of how you label it, those countries appear to have aggressively stopped Covid19 at their doors, or at worst in the foyer.
Countries with less capable healthcare systems had higher fatality rates.
Countries with older populations had higher fatality rates.
I beleive that is pretty much the end of the differences.
No other factors appear to have had any effect. All nations show much the same pattern,
Covid19 spread through their populations in much the same way, at much the same rate, taking much the same about of time to peak.
Even a rank amateur in data analysis would conclude that all the differences between countries approaches – besides those very few I noted had no discernible effect.
It is bad enough that we acted driven by fear. It is much worse that we are not open to learning from the results.
I said from the begining – that we would take these draconian actions, and that when it was over, no matter what the results we would declare victory, and pat ourselves on the back for having averted even worse catastropy, And we would do so, despite the likely evidence that the measures we had taken were ineffective and harmful.
Every bit of that is true.
Like I said, tell our governor that. Big box stores that until just the last couple weeks had.lines and crowds in the stores were open, while mom and pop stores were boarded up since late march. Why should Costco and Walmart be able to sell jeans, but a small store that might have a couple shoppers are ordered closed. Guess mom and pop dont make political contributions, but Walmart and Costco do.
So vote based on that in November.
I’m going to paste a good sized chunk from a believable paper in here I highly recommend reading the whole article as well
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/24/the-results-of-coronavirus-serosurveys-are-starting-to-be-released-heres-how-to-kick-their-tires/
At worst an 0.9 rate of false positives Dave? Show me your sources please. That sounds like dangerous and highly misleading optimism.
“….So about those false positives and false negatives?
No test is perfect. And the sheer number of antibody tests — Dutch virologist Marion Koopmans recently saw nearly 275 on a list maintained by the WHO — makes it very tough at this stage to know how good any of them actually are. The WHO is working with a number of labs trying to validate tests, said Van Kerkhove, who added: “Unfortunately that takes a little bit of time.”
In particular, the rapid tests appear not to perform well at all. Koopmans, the head of virology at Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, said the Dutch national serology task force has recommended that people not use the rapid tests, because of the risk that people will get a false result and assume — if it was a positive — that they have protection they do not in fact have.
Every serology test is going to produce some erroneous results. Some people who were truly sick will test negative — that’s a false negative. Some people who were not sick will test positive — that’s a false positive.
Each commercial test comes with guidance from the manufacturer about how “sensitive” it is — in other words, what percentage of true positive cases it will detect — as well as how “specific” it is, meaning how good it is at not generating false positive results.
Those estimates are especially important when the rate of infection in an area is likely low. Even a small over-estimate — say a 5% false positive rate — can vastly increase the final projection of how many people in a location had been infected.
Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Diseases Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, drew up a chart to explain how different rates of sensitivity and specificity will impact a serology study in an area with 1 million people, using a test that had 95% sensitivity (caught all but 5% of true positives) and 95% specificity (designated as positive only 5% of people who were actually negative).
If 5% of the population had been infected with SARS-CoV-2, there would have been 50,000 infected people. This test would find 47,500 (the true positives) but it would miss 2,500 (the false negatives). And it would detect 47,500 false positives — as many false positives as true positives. If the rate of infection in the community was smaller, the percentage of wrong results would rise.
If the rate of infection in the community increased, the errors become less substantial. If 15% of the community — 150,000 — had been infected, this test would find 142,500 true positives, 42,500 false positives, and would miss 7,500 cases — the false negatives.
Applying this knowledge to Thursday’s results from New York puts the picture in sharper focus. The release from the state doesn’t disclose the sensitivity of the test used, but it does note the specificity is between 93% and 100%, a “huge range,” Ashish Jha, head of Harvard’s Global Health Institute, noted on Twitter. If the test performed at the low end of that range, New York’s infection rate would be closer to 7% — half the figure Cuomo announced — and nearly one out of every two positives would have been a false positive, Jha said.
“These tests don’t perform like people think they do and so there are a lot of crazy results,” Osterholm said. “You can often find more than half of the positives you do document are actually false positives.”
People who don’t understand how challenging serology testing is may assume a result is binary — positive or negative. But reading a result is nowhere near that black and white, Osterholm said.
Think that’s complicated? There’s more.
The whole goal with serological surveys is to get an estimate of the proportion of cases that testing missed. That means finding the people with mild infection.
But some emerging evidence suggests at least some people with really mild or almost symptom-free infections may have very low levels of antibodies — or no detectable antibody at all. That will complicate both the testing and the interpretation of any results.
“If people with mild disease don’t have antibodies, do they then have some kind of immunity or not at all?” Koopmans wondered.
Another potential complication arises from the fact that SARS-CoV-2 is a member of the coronavirus family, which includes four viruses that cause common colds. Most of us would have been infected by at least a few of these four over the courses of our lifetimes.
Are the new serology tests good enough to distinguish SARS-2 antibodies from those generated by the other human coronaviruses? Or will some of them pick up a false signal?
“We know that it’s a potential problem,” the WHO’s Van Kerkhove said, adding that’s why it is so important that tests are validated. Part of the validation process is testing the assays on blood samples drawn — before the new virus emerged — from people who have had previous coronavirus infections.
In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration has taken the extraordinary step of allowing test manufacturers to market serological tests that haven’t yet undergone agency review, as long as they have undergone validation in the hands of the manufacturer.
But Koopmans said sometimes this type of validation is minimal.
Natalie Dean, an assistant professor of biostatistics at the University of Florida who has been critiquing some of the serology studies on Twitter, said this approach is kind of an about-face for the FDA.
“I guess one of the important things to remember is that the FDA faced all those challenges with PCR testing” — the type of testing used to confirm active infection — “and being very stringent. And so what appears to have happened is sort of a swing in the other direction, where now they’re being quite lax,” Dean said.
Still, with all the current problems, two things are clear.
The first: Whether the study was conducted in California or Denmark, in the Netherlands or Germany, most have shown the virus has not yet infected a big portion of the screened population.
“In general I think things have been pretty consistent. It’s only in the really hard-hit places that we’re seeing anything above a single-digit number,” said Dean. “The harder hit places have higher seroprevalence, but even the hard hit places don’t seem to have crazy numbers. Certainly not at the herd immunity level.”
That leads us to the second thing: The world still has no idea how to interpret the import of any of these studies.
The presence of antibodies suggests a person was previously infected. But are they protected? Most experts assume there will be at least short-term protection. But how long will it last? Will people with low levels of antibodies be as protected as people with higher levels? Could countries safely issue “immunity passports,” as several have suggested, that would allow people with proof of prior infection to return to work or move about more freely?
Only more experience with this new virus will provide answers to those kinds of questions. “At the current time, there’s a lot of problems with that [idea],” Van Kerkhove said about the immunity passports. “Because antibody does not mean immunity.”
About the Authors
Robby,
I do not need to prove anything. You want to check the source – go ahead.
Absolutely there are questions about the different studies. Absolutely there are unasnwered questions about false positives – and unasked questions about false negatives. Errors almost never lean only one way.
Absolutely there are questions about methodology.
“Some of the serological studies have also been more rigorous than others. Epidemiologists and statisticians have criticized some of the early headline-generating surveys for how they recruited participants and analyzed the data.”
The above from YOUR article.
But there is something else that is true. Different tests, accross the country, accross the world, using different methods are all falling into the same range – 3.7%-16% of the population was infected.
And they are NOT evenly distrubted – the tests all fall at one extreme or the other.
The random tests of currently infected people – not antibody tests, are all running close to 3.7% of the population – iceland, Germany, several places in the US where random testing for ACTIVE covid19 all came out at very near 4%.
Then the antibody tests, again accross the world are ALL coming out at about 15%.
You can attack each test individually – all of these tests have problems.
But the likelyhood of all of them having errors that all fall the same way is highly improbably.
I do not think we are actually going to hit 15% of the population.
Because most of these tests were done in densely populated areas – the Miami area of FL, Near LA, or NYC and surrounds.
But I do think that is likely to be the infection rate in metro areas.
But say I am wrong.
A US infection rate of 1% reduces the CFR by a factor of 3 – The fatality rate of the 1918 flu But with far far fewer infections.
A US Infection rate of 5% results in an IFR of a bad flu.
A US infection rate of 15% results in an IFR much like the flu – only 2months instead of 8 months.
In the US about 2.8M people die per year. If you are correct – this year it will be 2.9M.
Except that thus far the data shows that atleast 2/3 of those who died bould have died in the next 6 months – so that brings us back to 2.83m
As to your long except – lots of hype about hypotheticals.
Your authors claim not to know the rate of false positives, or the rate of false negatives, and then assume in their hypotheticals that they do know them and that they are different.
Could be true. But I am always suspicious of constructed hypotheticals that aim for a specific result.
Next, your article makes claims about CA, Germany, … but it does not assign values to those claims. Just valueless statements like “have not shown large portions of the population infected”
What is large ? 3%, 10% ? 20% ?
Your respected paper is just a bunch of speculation that leans one way.
Where have we seen this before ?
On the way up. First there would be 7M deaths in the US, then 2M, then 200K, then 60K+.
Absolutely the article is correct – we do not know.
At the same time we do know that pretty uniformly the “experts” have assumed that the results would match their prefered outcome, and the real world has ignored that preference.
BTW some of the early statements in this are FALSE.
The actual IFR has no real impact on our choices right not.
It is unimportant whether this has stalled at 20% of the population or at 3%. So long as it has stalled – which it has done world wide.
I can speculate too. lets say only single digit percents have been infected – Iceland, Germany, and the US found just under 4% using the active virus test in random sampling a few weeks back – so lets use 3.7%.
Why did it stop about there ? It is stopping about there in much of the world.
It does not appear to have anything to do with measures we have taken to thwart it.
I can speculate too – most people arround the world have gotten a corona virus cold – it is possible that Covid19 is similar enough to other corona viruses that infection by one gives some immunity to the other.
OR we know this sucker targets the weak. Maybe only 4% of the population is sufficiently unhealthy to be susceptible.
Or maybe it is declining world wide because …. Summer – that does not explain the souther hemisphere and it does not explain sweden.
But it does explain why in the US for the most part this has been worse in the north.
FL which should have been hit very hard, did quite well (relatively).
Regardless, Robby the point is anyone can engage in speculation.
And thus far the evidence is the “experts” have been really bad at speculation.
So given that these assorted purportedly flawed tests are giving very close results across the globe. I am not including to beleive that everyone has made the same mistakes.
But as your author noted – more tests are coming.
“If you accept that Trump is probably going to win, you have also accepted my assertion that most people have gotten used to or ignoring Trump’s rhetoric.”
You are a very silly man. That is a ridiculous statement. First, you are starting from a false premise, that I accept that trump is probably going to win. Reread what I actually said more carefully. Even if I had said that, your extrapolation is still logically absurd, it makes giant unsupported leaps to get to the nonsense conclusion that you wanted to reach. Have some logical person in your circle explain it to you.
I’ve done my best with this, peace be with you, you can live in your happy bubble, its not my business.
“You are a very silly man. That is a ridiculous statement. First, you are starting from a false premise, that I accept that trump is probably going to win. Reread what I actually said more carefully. ”
Here is what you said.
“The issue was not “can trump possibly win?” I have always said that it is possible, in fact its an even bet and I still think so.”
My statement:
“If you accept that Trump is probably going to win, you have also accepted my assertion that most people have gotten used to or ignoring Trump’s rhetoric.”
The only “logical leap” I have made is assuming that people do not vote for those they can not tolerate.
If you do not lecture me on logic, I will not lecture you on Russian or music.
I am not sure what the difference between “trump is probably going to win” and “its an even bet” – though the bookies have Trump up by 5pts so it is NOT an even bet.
Regardless the LOGICAL difference between an “even bet” and “trump is probably going to win”, is not large enough to alter the conclusion – “most people have gotten used to or are ignoring Trump’s rhetoric”
I also do not understand why you want to fight over such nonsense.
Back to Logic – for my conclusion to be false.
Most people would have to despise Trump’s rhetoric AND still vote for him anyway.
That is possible, it is not likely.
And the form of logic we are dealing with is probablistic, not absolute.
In other words I would not be logically wrong – silly or ridiculous, just because the remote possibility exists that
“Most people despise Trump’s rhetoric AND still vote for him anyway. ”
If you are going to characterize my logic as “silly or ridiculous” – please rest such claims in the actual rules of logic. Not emotion and oppinion.
I do not live in a bubble. I live pretty far outside the bubble.
I live in a country that went heavily for Trump, but within a social circle that is strongly anti-Trump. I can easily find either Trump supporters or detractors at my fingertips.
I am not personally in either bubble. I am on the outside of both looking in at each.
Here is Turley excellently demolishing the Trump is going to stage a coup nonsense.
This is chock full of goodness.
1). How many of the purported Trump conspiracy theories have proven true ?
I do not know if Covid came from a lab in China. But I do know that the claim is NOT a conspiracy theory. There is more evidence of that now than the wet market.
2). How about that Trump was spied on conspiracy theory ?
3). How about that the Russians interfered in the election to help Trump conspiracy theory ?
If you have not been paying attention what with lockdowns and all, the entire Intelligence community assessment is coming unraveled. Turns out that analysts in CIA, NSA, and FBI had more than a year early established that Steele was being feed deliberate disinformation by the Russians. That the FBI, CIA, NSA all knew this, and that all members of the intelligence community who knew the Steele Dossier was garbage fed by Putin to Steele and Clinton for the purpose of helping CLINTON. Because as numerous analyst reported – Putin thought he could work with and manipulate Clinton – Trump – not so much.
4). If Prof. Lee – the bat shit crazy woman talking about Trump subliminally programing robot child soldiers sounds slightly familiar – that is because she is this now obviously way off her meds woman is the psychologists who claims to have diagnosed Trump as crazy in 2017.
Prof. Lee was quite actively being pedaled as an expert we should all trust by other posters on TNM a few years ago.
And aparently as Turley notes way to many ranking members of congress.
5). Then we have Biden going postal. Please tell me again that Biden is not losing it.
Here we have a real conspiracy theory. Absolutely, Trump is probably overstepping his authority with the Post office – to screw over Jeff Bezos. Not because the post office has any consequential role in elections. If you want me to get pissed about Trump playing games with the post office to fork over Bezos – I am with you. That is wrong. Trump should not do that. That is a time honored presidential traditon that should be ended. In the cases of USPS just sell it. I am sure Bezos will buy it.
Beyond that as Turley noted, Elections are run by the states, not the federal government. The date of the election is set by federal law – Trump would have to get Pelosi’s consent to change it. And election of not, Trump ceases to be President on Jan, 20, 2021, absent winning re-election – NO MATTER WHAT. I doubt that Trump would go to all this trouble to put Pelosi in the whitehouse until there was an actual election victor.
And not only is Biden pedaling this nonsense – and the media and other posters here selling this garbage – but Biden’s prospective VP candidates are repeating this nonsense to left wing reporters who are practically begging them NOT to go to that stupid place.
Dave, the number of wildly optimistic assumptions you are making is staggering. You are in argument mode full tilt now. I’ve seen how that goes many times, you will defend the most absurd points using the most cherry picked optimistic data regarding covids lethality and the the effectiveness of our attempts to contain it.
This is not about bullshit internet debating, it’s life and death for real people and it’s also about a staggering blow to the economy and the balance between the two.
I am for making large strides to open the economy and prevent a real depression, but it’s not based on pretending that covid is just a bad flu and that all the most optimistic events are going to occur on the medical front. We are likely going to kill a lot of people as we reopen the economy but we are also in deep shit if we don’t.
I am done discussing this with you, you will say anything to support absurd positions the argument has gone off the deep end. It’s a shame that there has to be a coservative and a liberal view of this, in the liberal view we can just go on national vacation for six or nine months and borrow money to pay for that and in the conservative view covid is not that deadly, it’s overhyped and perhaps even being used to bring down trump. I am exaggerating a bit, but not that much and there are quite a few people who believe what I just wrote.
Putting the bad medical situation against the terrible economic consequences is a wretched choice we have to make with our eyes fully open.
If I am making numerous widely optomistic assertions – identify them.
I do not see that.
Nor do I see that much of my analysis depends on ANY optomistic assumptions.
In fact I see the exact opposite – Any claim that government actions in this have actually had a benefit requires beleiving a highly improbable set of claims – interestingly claims that the same “experts” that say all this has worked, also claimed BEFORE did not model any benefit except flattening the curve.
Robby – there is a near universal concensus that we have significantly overestimated Covid19’s mortality. They only question is by how much.
That said, you entirely missed the fact that the mortality rate is actually little more than a point of interest.
It does not matter whether Covid19 has a 100% fatality rate and infected 56000 people,
or whether it has a .1% fatality rate and infected 56M people.
What matters is that it killed ONLY 56K people thus far, and there is no good reason to beleive that number would have been significantly different without the lockdown.
There is no “optomism” to that assertion.
While I can not tell you WHY at this time Covid19 has peaked at 56K deaths. There remains far to much about this that is unknown. I can tell you that it is incredible PESSIMISSIM that has ruled the day not optimism.
Pessimism such that we have destroyed our economy to protect us from disasters that we never likely, and that we would not have stopped anyway.
Absolutely this is real. But as has been done from the very begining, you and others are trading very REAL economic consequences that include both LOST and WASTED lives, against hypothetical deaths that neither the information we had then. nor now justify.
Worse still what has been done has NOT saved lives. And that is not “overly optomistic” that is the damning conclusion of real world data.
“flattening the curve” only saves lives if it protects the healthcare system from failure.
REAL WORLD DATA, shows that occured in only 3 places in the developed world – Italy, Spain, and Wuhan.
No other developed nation – regardless of the strategy they employed has seen their healthcare system over taxed by this.
The US healthcare system was never pushed beyond 1/3 of maximum capacity – and that only in NYC and even then we probably had surge capacity 100% greater than that for possibly a week.
Regardless, the point is we did not come close.
So you DID NOT SAVE LIVES.
While the “experts” are not vocally saying that right now, that was THEIR ARGUMENT for the actions taken, and THEIR PREMISIS – not mine, Have not been met.
It is not even obvious form the data that we “flattened the curve” at all.
Data comparisons accross the world see nearly identical patterns for Covid19 in every nation in the world regardless of the measures taken.
About the only measurable differences that had real impact is a few countries have successfully stopped this at or very near their borders.
Accross the entire world that is the only pattern difference that is evident in real world DATA.
That is not “overly optimistic”.
We can “internet debate” – the reasons for that. But the FACT is that the patterns are the same pretty much every where.
You say this is all about “saving lives” and that Trumps the economy.
That is false, on both points – the economy is about lives, in myriads of ways.
But most importantly – YOU DID NOT SAVE LIVES.
Absolutely our Doctors and nurses saved lives – the Mortality rate in the US is lower than in Italy and Spain and Wuhan and many other places with less capable healthcare systems.
But there is absolutely zero evidence that shutting does the economy “saved lives”
While we will get more data over time.
We will find out ultimately whether the R0 is much higher than we thought (and the IFR is therefore much lower) or whether for reasons we do not fully understand about ANY VIRUS, the infection rate is quite low and the fatality rate high.
But we KNOW that we did not save lives by locking things down.
How do we know that ? Multiple ways.
We did not overwhelm the healthcare system anywhere except Italy, Spain and Wuhan.
In the US we did not even come close.
The pattern of the progression of the virus is no different in any country regardless of policy measures EXCEPT border control (and actual quarantine).
And just to be clear – that is what the models that the experts used claimed, that is what the experts claimed.
Yo claim now that these measures saved lives is to disown the arguments made to shutdown the economy in the first place.
Your response does not make an argument.
Accross several paragraphs you insult my arguments – calling an argument stupid or overly optomisitic does not demonstrate either.
You assert that is all about saving lives – on that we agree.
But you fail to grasp that if you justify the use of force by claiming that you will save lives,
ultimately you MUST save lives.
My main and damning argument is that “the emperor has no clothes” – there is no evidence that destroying the economy has saved ONE life.
I can go on and on about data and patterns. and …
But it is already self evident – shutting down the economy was “anxiety theater” – it was doing something – anything, in order to appear to be doing something.
And so we do not devolve this into political or personal acrimony – though there are differences in the scale of the error between democrats and republicans. the FACT is that
Nearly all politicians and much of the public bought into this.
You say that this “saved lives” ….. SHOW ME.
You have taken jobs from Millions of people, you have deliberately caused the equivalent of “the great depression” – I think is reasonable to expect that you can PROVE that you “saved lives”.
The fact is – YOU CANT. That is obvious, and it is likely to be more so over time.
We can argue the appropriateness of government response to covid-19, if it was right or wrong.
But the issue I believe is a monumental failure in the fight against this illness is long term facilities. It was reported by KFF 4/23/2020, a non-profit in California, focused on health care issues that “Long-term care facilities account for a notable share of all COVID-19 cases and deaths in many states. In six states – Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Utah – such deaths account for over 50 percent of all COVID-19 deaths. Overall, cases in long-term care facilities make up 11 percent of all coronavirus cases in the 29 states that report cases. Deaths in long-term care facilities account for 27 percent of all deaths in the 23 states that report deaths.”
I suspect looking at these same numbers today if someone wanted to do the extensive research (because there are pages of old reports on the web with no current showing on the first 2 pages provided) they would find this has probably increased.
Long term facilities have traditionally been under staff, under reimbursed for services, short on supplies and usually under trained. In addition, hospitals are reluctant to take patients from long term facilities because getting rid of them back to a nursing facility is very difficult (shortages of beds due to government CON laws)) and some LTF’s do not want to let some patients go to a hospital because they may end up with a new patient filling that bed with conditions that are reimbursed at a lower rate. So they keep a covid patient when they should go to the hospital.
Dave hates government involvement and I am one that favors as little involvement as possible. But this situation shows how LTF’s have been ignored for years in many parts of the country. Our older population is a throw away generation once they get sick. LTF’s should be required (and reimibursed) for supplies needed to combat any virus and staff trained to maintain contagions at a minimum at all times. Even the flu can be deadly to individuals in LTF’s. They have been that last to get supplies, last to get trained and have been forgotten until deaths begin to mount, at which time its too late.
And don’t say “they would have died anyway from something else”!
Ron- Kinda like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis today calling His state “God’s waiting room” for the elderly… using that homily to mitigate Florida’s Covid death rate spike.
You had not heard that before? That is something used often out this way for retirees moving to Florida.
“We’re moving”
“Where to”
“Gods waiting room, Florida” …laugh laugh
Is that a problem out there?
By all evidence Florida should have been the Italy of the US.
It was not.
It was not despite having a republican governor and some of the least intrusive interventions.
FL routinely under reports deaths over the weekend with a spike on monday.
Nothing new.
There is one place where the absolute pure libertarian ism that I am usually arguing is inadequate.
That is with people who are truly unable to make their own choices.
We can fight over the relative role of government in dealing with children, but no one is arguing that toddlers should be free to make their own choices.
The same is true of those with serious mental deficits or debilities that diminish their capacity.
This entire area is incredibly messy. Unarguably absent government intervention, there are those who would prey on those unable to manage their own affairs. At the same time the track record of government intervention is incredibly horrid.
There is a very old book – “Weeping in the play time of others”, that I read back in the 80’s.
That documents what many parents have done to their kids, AND what our child welfare system has done to those kids in protecting them. There are no good guys in that.
Charles Manson is the product of our child protective system.
Regardless, my point is that there is no clear answer provided by principles – libertarain or otherwise.
Specifically addressing your concerns about LTF’s.
NO!!! We do not need more regulation, more government involvement.
There was a very specific and predictable failure – though it is larger than just LTF’s with respect to our handling of Covid19.
We did almost precisely the wrong thing. Instead of locking the entire country down, we should have focussed on TWO groups, The most vulnerable, and the sick.
Instead of ordering EVERYONE to “shelter in place” we should have ordered
Everyone with symptoms to report their illness to their doctor and to self quarantine.
AND we should have ordered anyone with risk factors that increased the likelyhood of death to do the same.
Then the government “aid” should have been directed specifically at those people.
The federal government could have passed legislation that provided 1 month of income for anyone who tested positive for Covid19 AND sheltered in place. AND precluded employers from firing employees who reported in sick. There also could have been fines and manditory quarantines for those who failed to self quarantine.
There are means to abuse or game this – but they are much less than what we did pass.
And we could have done something similar for “the most vulnerable”.
Supliment the income of those who were at highest risk, while requiring them to self quarantine.
Specifically regarding LTF’s – lock them down, limit those going in and out and impliment testing of those going in and out.
Taiwan fairly effectively stalled the spread using InfraRed thermometers.
Restaurants remained open, But patrons forehead temps were checked at the door and you were turned away if you were elevated.
Data from all over the world is telling the same story – much more than 2/3 of the people who died from this are people with very serious health problems.
It is probable that eventually we will be able to narrow this to SPECIFIC health problems.
It is normal for the Flu, Colds, similar diseases to be worse and even to kill the most frail.
To kill those who are already dying.
My father died of Pneumonia in an LTF. When he arrived one month earlier, he had a host of life threatening problems and it was a miracle that he had survived the summer.
But Pneumonia was not on the list of terminal threats he had.
Still no one is suing the home – he was going to die, and we all knew it.
Yes, my concern that Covid19 is killing large numbers of people who were going to die anyway is not very high.
Regardless, you are correct that it is also killing substantial numbers of people with very serious health problems who are NOT terminal. And we should have protected them, and we did not.
We stupidly fixated on doing something we have NEVER DONE before and tried to protect the entire population from an airborne virus, and by diluting our efforts, we left the actually at risk in much greater danger.
Robby criticises me for purportedly not caring about keeping people alive.
But the actual approach we took significantly favored protecting the healthy over those at the greatest risk.
It is likely that had we focused on those at risk rather than trying to protect the entire population, we would have saved more lives and done less damage.
Was this Pence after hearing Trump was on the phone earlier, with Nikki…
Does your post mean something ?
Pence should have warn a mask.
But unless he is infected, failing to do so is only a risk to himself.
A choice he gets to make.
And he has been judged accordingly…
This does not look good, but it does not bother me like most people because I worked where I was constantly in contact with “entitled” individuals that knew their poop did not stink. Pence knew he had been tested multiple times, had been badically isolated from anyone who might have it over the past 2-3 weeks and said he was “entitled individual” that does not need to follow the rules.
Had it been me, i would have treated him just like anyone else. But thats me, not impressed by position and rules are rules. So they will take some heat until the next media frenzy issue comes up.
Well well, Hillary endorses sexual assaulter Biden. No one should question her actions, she stayed married to a sexual predator for years and still is (on paper)
The Reade allegation against Biden is serious, and gains strength by the day.
That said it is not easily distinguishable from SOME of the credible allegations against Trump.
It does harm Biden in his race against Trump. It also casts alot of doubt on the claims that “uncle Joe’s” conduct in myriads of other reported incidents is bengin.
But it does not make Biden into Bill Clinton, It does make him into Donald Trump.
I think the more important aspect of the growing Reade story is NOT about Biden,
but about the left, democrats, and the media.
The Reade story has actually been arround for a long time.
Had it been taken seriously and properly investigated a year ago. It is unlikely Biden would have stayed in the race.
Unlike Dr. Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh – Reade’s story gains in credibility over time.
Reade, did tell people at the time who are coming forward to confirm her story.
The Larry King clip of her mother in the 90’s is damning.
Further Reade claims to have reported the incident to the DNC and the Senate at the time.
There are likely records of that if true and those will likely eventually come out.
If Dr. Ford had this kind of corroboration Kavanaugh would not be a supreme court justice.
But ultimately for me, this story is NOT about Biden, or Kavanaugh (or Trump).
But about democrats, the left and the media.
And the double standard of dealing with these types of complaints.
Though I would note one other thing regarding the Reade Story.
If it is true, it is likely that slowly more women will come forward with similar stories.
SOME of those will be Julie Swetnick frauds. But not all.
This is not likely to be going away.
Even left leaning media like ‘the rising” is slamming democrats and the media for not taking this seriously.
I cannot fathom how Biden makes it to the general election, and if he does, how he gets through the campaign successfully. To me, he’s got as much political baggage as Hillary, although people do like him a lot more. And, whether or not he suffers from some form of early dementia, he definitely has difficulty expressing himself, something that will be more obvious when he needs to be in public more often.
Maybe the anti-Trump vote will be enough to elect him, but I just don’t know. Justin Amash may take some votes from Trump, allthough he may take them from Biden as well. That’s an unknown right now.
As it is, the coronavirus and the shutdown are the only things in the news. We’ll have to wait until things with that settle down a bit, and then see. Although, if we’re in a great depression by then, who the hell knows what will happen?
The Libertarians will do the same as they always do. Nominate someone and then disappear. Gary Johnson should have at least doubled his vote total of 4M given the bad major party candidates. Ross Perot, whose political positions were almost copied by Trump received 19 M votes in 92 against two strong candidates
Justin Amash will make the libertarian headlines and then disappear only to capture 2-3M votes in November.
I have alot of disagreement with Amash.
But I like him alot.
I am not so sure he is going to be the libertarian Presidential candidate.
Though he certainly appears to be contending for the position.
If so I wish him well.
It is likely I will vote for whoever the libertarians run.
But we will see.
Yeah, it’s hard to imagine Amash taking a huge number of votes away from Trump. He was a Freedom Caucus Republican, who was forced to resign from the caucus for voting with Democrats. And he’s continued to vote with Democrats, after declaring himself an Independent. He voted to impeach Trump. He’s had business ties to China, which is unlikely to be a good thing in this year’s election.
The way I see it, the anti-Trump votes he would get would probably be from people who would never have voted for Trump anyway, and might have otherwise voted for Biden.
I will likely vote for Amash if he is the Libertarain candidate.
But I would not bet on that.
I would really like Austin Peterson, but he ran for Senate as a Republican and says he is committed to remaining a republican. He would have made a much better senator than Hawley.
No I do not expect libertarians to do as well this year as johnson.
And Bill Weld really betrayed the libertarian party by getting the Libertarian VP nod in 2016 and then partway through the election started campaigning for Hillary.
Johnson probably could have added another point or two but for that.
How many people do you know who voted for Trump in 2016 who absolutely will not vote for him in 2020 ?
How many people do you know who voted libertarian in 2016 who are going to vote democrat in 2020 ?
I know lots of Trump voters and lots of Clinton voters and a few Johnson voters.
I do not know any Trump voters who are voting for Biden in 2020.
I do not know any libertarians who are voting democrat.
If anything I know more republicans or republicanish voters who sat out 2016 who will vote for Trump in 2020.
This is pretty damning. But the real meat is pretty far in.
The giant elephant in the room is not the “side deal” with Flynn’s attorney’s not to prosecute his son. It is that the PROSECUTOR’s deliberately sought to reach that agreement in a way that they would not have to disclose – not to the court, and even more importantly not to otehr defendants that Flynn might testify against.
This article is calling this Giglio material. That is somewhat similar to “brady” material.
It is information that prosecutors are CONSTITUTIONALLY bound to provide parties they are prosecuting. Brady holds that the prosecution can not withold from the defense any evidence in their posession that suggests the defendant might be innocent.
A easy example is if the police interview 10 people and one of those provides the defendant with an alibi, even if the police or prosecutors do not beleive that witness, they must provide the defendant with that witnesses statement.
Giglio says that if the prosecution has a deal with a witness in return for their testimony, the defense must be made fully aware of that deal. If prosecutors make a deal with a witness for reduced charges in return for cooperation, then the defense and the jury must know that for every other defendant the witness testifies against.
Justice is not served when prosecutors get to hide information to decieve judges and juries.
There is already numerous instances of the FBI and Mueller failing to provide Brady material to those they were targeting. That is prosecutorial misconduct. Now we have several more instances.
So that this is clear even to Jay – Even if a prosecutor may coerce a defendent into pleading guilty and acting as a cooperating witness by threatening to prosecute his son – even when that action is legal and constitutional – which itself is or should be dubious,
The prosecutor can not hide that from the courts, and from those they prosecute using that witness.
If I make a deal with a prosecutor to be a witness against others in return for the prosecutor not prosecuting my son – are those I testify against, are the judges in those cases, and the jury in those cases not required to know that my testimony is coerced or induced ?
If the prosecution paid a witness and the jury was not told – would you be OK with that ?
The big deal here is not about Flynn – it is about Van Gracken and more broadly about the Mueller prosecution.
As things stand this conduct is prosecutorial misconduct. In a just world the failure to disclose Brady or Giglio material would be a crime and prosecutors who did so would go to jail. Failure to disclose brady or giglio material is the same as trying to Frame a defendant.
Most of us would understand that as a crime.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/27/robert-muellers-case-against-michael-flynn-is-about-to-implode/
This Flynn editorial by Andrew McCarthy is pretty damning, but it is missing a large amount that is newly discovered.
The Mueller prosecutors LIED to multiple courts, regarding the deal with Flynn.
This is absolute prosecutorial misconduct and it is not just about Flynn.
In these cases Flynn was a witness or prospective witness. The prosecutors were obligated to fully disclose everything about their arrangements with Flynn in return for his testimony.
Any inducements in particular are critical – such as even a between lawyers only promise not to prosecute his son.
So we have Flynn being criminally prosecuted for a lie that no one even knows what is,
and we have federal prosecutors who will get off scott free for lying – not to FBI agents, but to judges, defense attorney’s and juries.
In other interesting revelations in this, we find not only that the Obama administration was spying on Flynn through 2016 – something we sort of knew – even though we still do not know why – and just like Page, Flynn was KNOW to the FBI as an agent of the US operating with the CIA, DIA, FBI – everytime Flynn made contact with anyone from Russia he was briefed by US intelligence services BEFORE AND AFTER.
But in addition to spying on Flynn – we now know that the Obama administration was spying on Pence – as Yates efforts to get Flynn fired were based on TWO peices of information.
First the transcript of the conversation with Kislyak, and 2nd Pence’s private conversations about that call. So how is it that Yates knows what Pence is saying privately ?
Lets be open and honest about this – the Obama administration was SPYING not just on a political opponent, but at this time on the elected president and vice president of the united states.
That has never happened before. If this is not criminal it should be.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/criminalizing-politics-the-investigation-of-general-flynn/
Dave, I think you are the only one paying any attention to this. I have seen nohing in my paper, have hearh nithing on local news, have seen nothing on national news ( what little I watch these days) and even nothing on political sites on social media.
I’ve been reading about it on Twitter ~ or “The Twit” as you like to call it, Ron, which I think is a great name. And McCarthy has been writing about it as well,in National Review.
It appears as if Flynn was literally set up, then pressured to plead guilty of lying to the FBI, based on prosecutors going after his family, if he didn’t take the plea bargain.
Also looks like his case will get thrown out by the judge. Or pardoned by the president.
Either way, unless those at the FBI and DOJ, who were responsible for destroying the good name and career of a decorated 3-star general, are held accountable, this crap will just continue.
Priscilla, “this crap will just continue.”
That was really my point. I think we might find a handful of outlets discussing it and it will end just like the Clinton e-mail issue ended.
And it just gets worse
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/28/grassley-demands-doj-release-all-exculpatory-information-on-michael-flynn/
And worse
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/breaking-fbi-notes-detail-effort-catch-flynn-lie-get-him
And worse
https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/29/explosive-new-flynn-documents-show-fbi-goal-was-to-get-him-fired/
What does it take to grasp that they were trying to frame Flynn ?
Actually notes where they ADMIT REPEATEDLY Trying to Frame Flynn ?
Where they go to a great deal of trouble to plot exactly how ?
Where they discuss anxiously that they might get caught ?
Now remember:
That Mueller MUST have known this shortly after starting his investigation.
So we have the FBI deliberately setting Flynn Up.
We have essentially admissions by Comey during his book tour that he did that.
We know have memos from Preistap and more texts from Page and Strzok PLOTTING how to set him up.
We have the 302’s immediately after the interview stating that Flynn was not lying.
We have Mueller going after Flynn AND his son anyway, and then we have Mueller striking a deal with Flynn and LYING to the court about it.
What more do you need to understand these people are the CRIMINALS.
If you had 1/10 this on Trump or Barr they would have been impeached 10 times over.
Dave, I preface by saying I care. I think Priscilla cares.
But in the large scheme of things ” who cares”?
Do you think this is going to make one iota of difference?
Is anyone going to lose jobs?
Is anyone going to jail?
Is anyone going to write a book and make millions?
If i had to bet on one, it would be the last one.
The allegation that they went after Flynn’s son to leverage him is not new.
That has been arround a long time.
However it no longer an allegation it is a fact.
Trying to leverage people in this way is extremely shady. It is not however illegal.
We will use their family against drug dealers and mafia bosses.
But because this kind of coercion has a high risk of getting false confessions and perjured testimony, there are standards and procedures that are supposed to be followed.
Not only was that not the case – but the prosecutors went out of their way to HIDE the fact that they had such a deal with Flynn specifically so that they would NOT have to follow procedures.
One of those procedures is that the court, the jury, and the defense all have to be notified of ANY deal that a prosecutor has with any witness.
Flynn testified against his business partner. The business partner was aquitted – because nothing they did was illegal. however the Judge, Jury and defense attorney’s in that case were NOT told that Flynn had a “between lawyers” agreement that if he cooperated his son would not be further criminally harrased.
This is not merely vile regarding Flynn, but it is a fraud by the prosecutors on the court.
I have been saying since shortly after Mueller was appointed that Mueller is NOT a good guy, He is NOT the gold standard, he is evil, and he will cut corners and hound innocent people to get convictions, he does not care if they are false. That claim is not based on his investigation of Trump, but on his entire carreer, whether it is Richard Jewel, or Bruce Ivens or Steven Hatfill. or any of numerous others.
Robert Mueller is a BAD GUY, He is a perversion of what prosecution should be,
And it should be no surprise that he fielded a team that stinks as badly as he does.
These tactics should not be used against ANYONE – not republicans, not democrats, not the mafia, not drug lords.
John Solomon has been following this too,
But the big deal is that excrutiatingly slowly the facts are coming out.
Most of this just confirms what has been alleged for years.
Though some bits are new.
But we are past where these things are allegations.
They are now facts, they are proof of misconduct by those involved.
Alot of this is political – in the republican democrat sense.
But an awful lot of it is much more personal.
Whatever bitter political feuds and power struggles might be going on within government
Those like McCabe, and Yates and Brennan and Clapper should not be able to use their positions and the power of government to subject others to CRIMINAL investigation and sanctions because of policy disagreements.
I honestly do not know if Flynn is a “hero” – I do not hold a very high view of much of the military brass. Nor do I have much doubt that Flynn is as much of a political game player as the rest of them. So I am not looking to lionize Flynn.
But he did serve the country. He did his job. Even if he was wrong (and it appears he was right), that is not an excuse to use the criminal law enforcement weapon of the government against him.
That kind of conduct is reprehensible.
I do not know whether Flynn is a great man.
But I know that everyone involved in persecuting him actually is more reprehensible than what Flynn is accused of.
Yes, we are in the 1984 world.
Facebook, Twitter and Youtube are taking down the posts and pages of any groups seeking to protest the shutdown orders of governors.
Aparently now the definition of “Science” is the utterances of the WHO – that would be the group that said facemasks are not beneficial and this does not spread between humans.
But god forbid that a couple of doctors should disagree with the WHI based on the actual real world data that they are seeing.
Misinformation – anything that dissents from the assertions of the powers that be is ThoughtCrime and can not be publicly permitted.
Regardless, RCP has listed a new development in Mueller/Flynn/Page/Russia Collusion pretty much every day.
As I posted before:
The FBI deemed Steele to be an unwitting Russian Agent in 2015.
Numerous IC analysts in 2016 reported that Putin favored Clinton – these people were all excluded from participating in the ICA report that asserted that Putin favored Trump, in fact of the 17 IC agencies only 3 were represented none of the representatives were the normal people who would draft and assessment, but hand picked by Brennan to get the results expected.
Apparently there is now reporting that Hillary KNEW that Steele was an unwitting Russian agent and used him anyway.
Barr sometime ago appointed a US Attorney to review the Mueller inquiry into Flynn and that Attorney is now forwarding to Powell – Flynn’s attorney, all the exculpatory material that Van Grack – the Mueller hack prosecuting Flynn failed to provide – and he has indicated there is much more to come. slowly the assorted allegations that Powell has been making over time are being documented and confirmed. Further more and more information that was previously redacted is getting made public.
With few exceptions there is “nothing new” – EXCEPT, that contested assertions that have been made and reported over the past 4 years are now established facts.
Most of these revelations standing alone should be damning. But because it has taken so long to pry out the truth and because most of what is now proven has been alleged for years, it is not getting lots of attention.
Among the things I find most disturbing is Flynn has been financially and otherwise destroyed and his son threatened over a statement to an FBI agent that no one thinks is a lie, and was a deliberate setup,
Yet we have MASSIVE evidence of lying all over the place by McCabe, Comey, Yates, Rice, Mueller, and his team. Lies of great consequence that have thrown the nation into termoil.
Lies to the media, lies under oath, lies to the AG, lies to the president of Vice President, Lies to the courts, and yet purportedly none of these warrant prosecution ?
While the Flynn story is part of the Obama spying on Trump story, it is almost bigger.
Flynn was specifically targeted for several reasons:
First he has highly critical of US intelligence gathering, asserting that as DIA the IC was NOT providing the information needed, but was shading what they provided to suit politics as well as actively pursuing information for political rather than actual national security reasons.
Next because he publicly and privately disagreed with Obama regarding Iran.
And finally because he stood up to McCabe providing an excellent reference for an FBA SAC who worked with Flynn and subsequently files a sexual harrasment allegation against McCabe.
There is a growing body of evidence that Flynn was uniquely and politically targeted – that the effort to take Flynn down had nothing to do with Russia, that Flynn was infact being investigated by the Obama administration and probably had a FISA warrant against him, again unrelated to Russia.
I do not know that Flynn is some great hero. But he served the country well, and it is really evil when we use the law enforcement tools of the government to criminalize political rivalry.
What is being done to Flynn is not a crime – it is a whole series of crimes.
Those involved should have to endure the same hell they put him through.
Flynn is not a criminal or a liar. But over and over, those who are seeking to take him down are.
This is not a democrat/republican thing. The efforts to take down Flynn started while he was working FOR Obama.
ATTENTION ANTI-BIDEN TRUMP ASS-KISSING PUNDITS: READ THIS:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/04/29/joe-biden-sexual-assault-allegation-tara-reade-column/3046962001/
Jay, you are worse than the one committing the crime. Same coverup bull shit that takes place anytime their politician is accused. Clinton accused, GOP jumps all over it, democrats do everything in their power to coverup and defend . Trump accused, democrats jump all over it, GOP does everything to discredit and defend. Cavanaugh accused, democrats jump all over it, GOP does everything to discredit and defend. Biden accused, GOP jumps all over it, Democrats defending and discrediting it.
When is this bull shit going to stop and politician going to begin taking women serious? Kristin Gilliland stood up in front of the senate and gave a compassionate speech supporting Christine Ford in her accusations against Cavanaugh and now turns around and says “”Vice President Biden has vehemently denied these allegations, and I support Vice President Biden,”. So did Cavanaugh, what changed?
When are you and everyone like you going to stop using politics in any sexual accusation to either defend or criticise a politician and begin supporting the accuser, no matter the political party. Every woman should be treated equally, should have her accusation investigated and be held responsible should any accusation be found to be false. Any politicians career should be treated the same as most people in public positions. Suspended (put on hold) until the accusations finalized by law enforcement or investigators.
Dont you think there are enough powerful men in this country that treat women with respect that could become president so we dont end up with two sexual preditors running for president?
The only people I have less respect for than the politician accused is the #metoo activist that ends up supporting and voting for the accused.
Ron, you’re getting loony.
Did you read the article or not?
Acutally no, read headline, same old political maneuvering crap.
Now I read it and its the same political maneuvering crap. Sounds much like Christine ford and her “recollection” of events that the Democrats supported whole hog and the GOP tried to demolish her reputation and story.
So I went back and tried to find comments when Ford accused K that we made. That is not easy when there are thousands of comments not just on one subject. But here are a few I made back then.
This is a “dave” length manuscript, but needs to be seen. It may be hard understanding the context of the comments since the thread has that, but I have been consistent in the political side of women coming forward.
……………………….. Concerning believing Women coming forward.
“WHOA…WAIT..The same party that ignored Juanita Broaddrick can flip flop just as quickly and decide that witnesses and exact information concerning illegal activities is not sufficient to keep their choices from getting a positive outcome.
Broaddrick’s accusations were just a few months old compared to Fords. She had witnesses. She told friends. People saw the results. They could testify.
Fords is 35 years old. She can not give any details that come close to Broaddricks and the dems believe her, but not Broaddricks.
………………..Concerning attacks on women coming forward
So as the right claims much of the information about K is made up, while the dems say K lied during his testimony, information comes forth that F lied during her testimony.
So now we have a he said she said he lied she lied along with I said this but now I meant that (Switnrck) lied in NBC interview.
Only our government can turn parliamentary process into a third rate circus!
……………………Concerning believing Ford
I believe this happened. I believe CF and K. CF provided information that indicates this happened and K provided information he was not in town when it was suppose to happen.
The one thing I would hope this fiasco is used for is educating kids. They need to see most of this, but especially the questioning concerning the year book. If yearbook entires where kids have always written things that are made up crap, what the heck is it going to be like when Facebook and Twitter stuff is uncovered in 30 years that kids post today?
This was difficult finding this, but I think it shows that I have been consistent with both women.
All that is required is consistency.
There are more problems with Ford than Reade.
There are more problems with most Trump accusers than Reade.
But the criticisms of Reade are valid is not determiniative.
And they apply to the rest of these two.
If you do not beleive Reade and you do not beleive the Trump accusers and you do not beleive Ford – then you are atleast plausibly consistent.
It is unlikely we will know the truth in any of these cases.
They all have problems.
One of those problems is that women who have been sexually assualted or raped, are often flakey, inconsistent, or have questionable motives.
And there are women who lie about these things too.
There is no lie detector that will tell them apart for us.
Jay,
Did you read it ?
The author points out each of a number of weaknesses in Reade’s allegations.
And those weaknesses are real.
They are also ALL present in Blaisley Ford’s story and in the stories of the women making allegations against Trump.
Most of those weaknesses are GREATER in Ford’s story or the Trump allegations.
And finally – all these REAL indicia of credibility are also present in innumerable instances where the claims ar eTRUE.
We beleive women who come forward right away.
But many many do not.
Or as is the case with Reade – they do but are ignored. Or they can not get the attention of the authorities and they try to get on with their lives.
We beleive women whose stories do not change over time.
But it is quite common that the initial report is substantially less significant than the final story.
Sometimes that is embelishment or attention seeking.
Sometimes it is embarrasment,
Regardless, the fact is it is extremely rare for a woman to give the entire truth of what happened in the first telling.
Reade claims to have told several people – SOME of those reported that – PUBLICLY.
It is really hard to have a more public report than on Larry King live in 1993.
Those Blaisly-Ford claimed to have confided in denied that too.
There is NO ONE who can demonstrate that Ford told anyone at the time.
There is video from Larry King that proves that Reade told atleast one person in 1993, AND that person alleges that she reported the allegation to the authorities in 1993.
I do not know who is telling the truth – but video from 1993 is pretty damning proof that Reade did not recently make this up.
Further with respect to those who claim the “never once” received complaints about Biden – that is completely credulous. Biden has been complained about throughout his public life for inappropriate contact. There are at this time no allegations of sexual assault. There are myriads of allegations of inappropriate touching.
Anyone making a blanket denial regarding Biden is themselves in denial – or covering up.
Reade claims she did make several formal complaints.
This is not a case of “missing” this is a case of uninvestigated.
Biden can defuse this by allowing access to senate, campaign and DNC records.
Complaints may not exist – we do not know that.
But Reade alleges that she made them.
And anyone who does not beleive that complaints get burried is naive.
Regardless, Mr. Stern makes a compelling case that Reade’s claim is not prosecutable.
Duh!. That is not the same as it is not credible.
It has many problems. It has many strength’s.
I would note an awful lot of Stern’s analaysis simply is “If I were a prosecutor, My perfect case would be”.
Guess what in the real world there are no perfect cases.
Honestly Jay – after reading Mr. Stern’s critique, I am more likely to beleive Reade.
Absolutely all of his objections are worth addressing.
They are all why we have statutes of limitations – why there is no possibility of prosecuting Biden for this.
But as with Kavanaugh, and the allegations against Trump we are not looking to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
After reading Mr. Stern’s article I beleive the probability that Biden is a sexual preditor is much higher than Kavanaugh, much lower than Clinton and about the same as Trump.
This is a difficult topic.
It is absolutely true that women who come forward are excoriated.
It is also true that the press has mostly burried claims of sexual harrassment.
The behavior of NYT, Wapo NBS on these stories has been horrid.
There is also a self evident political bias – stories about republicans are more likely to receive press coverage than those of democrats.
But there are also false stories. Julie Swetnick comes to mind.
There is good reason to be skeptical – particularly where there is little to support the claims and they are old.
I do not know whether to beleive Reade. I would note that there is MORE to the reade story than the Blaisley Ford story. There is also more than MOST but not all allegations against Trump. But some of the allegations regarding Trump are as credible as Reade is.
If you choose to beleive Reade it would be hypocritical not to beleive some of the allegations against Trump.
If you choose not to beleive Rade it would be hypocritical to beleive the allegations against Trump.
Its a well written piece Jay (and Ron). This accuser is an obvious flake who has told a series of very different stories. She obviously has her agendas, both personal and political. The timing makes that completely obvious. Didn’t get her progressive candidate, wah, now she thinks she can undo millions of Dem votes for the moderate candidate with her story, that is my take. &*^%$# progressives, they will do anything other than accept that the Dem party is not really theirs. The progressive media are joining the right wing media in trying to use this to their advantage. Ain’t gonna work, Sanders is done.
I’ve forgotten the name of the obviously nutty Kavanaugh accuser (Julie something?), well this lady is in that category. When it turns into a legitimate series of Ford-like credible women that make these claims against Biden I will start to think there is a serious problem. So far its been one progressive flake last year claiming the Biden breathed on her (in front of a crowd no less!), some photo-shopped right wing crap, and this latest progressive flake.
So, the trump world had better hope something real shows up to save the Lysol presidency, because this ain’t it.
And if the national political subject turns to sexual assault, then all the better, lets by all means have that conversation and it sure as hell is a minefield for trump, lets revisit his 16 accusers and his lifetime of proudly disgusting remarks.
I’m glad this is happening now, its good timing, get whatever accusations there are to be made out in the open and then examine each now. Metoo accusations against high profile males are now simply inevitable. The larger the number of accusers the more persuadable people will listen.
Its obvious that no man will ever again run for high office without a metoo accusation. When its the situation that Cosby was in, yes I believe the women; with trump, with Clinton, they left trails of sleazy behaviors that one would have to be blind to miss. I don’t doubt that Biden has been rather too personal with women as a pattern, politicians as a class have some big *&^%$ egos, like sports or rock stars, but Biden’s behaviors do not credibly rise to the level of rape or sexual assault (at least not as revealed as yet).
Robby,
Was she a flake in 1993 ? Did she have a political agenda then ?
Has she any less of an agenda than Blaisley Ford ? Or and of the other #meToo people ?
Further what do those things matter ?
Absolutely we weigh these things trying to decide who we beleive.
But in the real world harrasment and rape are not things that only occur to people without political leanings, or people who are not “flakes”.
In fact the opposite is true. Preditors choose the most vulnerable – the “flakes” the easily discredited and they portray those that chalenge them as flakes.
Are you saying that Weinstein should not be in jail ?
Every criticism of Tara Reade can be leveled at Christine Blaisley Ford – and then some.
It can also be leveled at those who have made claims against Trump.
If you decide you do not beleive Reade – I can live with that – I do not know.
I am not personally making a big deal about Reade’s allegations against Biden.
I think overall they are stronger than those of Dr. Ford, but only slightly stronger than those against Trump.
I do not think it is fair of me to dismiss SOME of the claims against Trump while claiming that Reade is clearly telling the truth. But the converse is true.
With respect to the politics – Reade did not plot 30+ years ago to favor Trump over Biden.
She told people AT THE TIME, She claims to have made a report to Biden’s staff, the DNC and the Senate AT THE TIME. She can not corroborate that. Though the Larry King remarks of her mother strongly suggest that she did and it was burried.
The point is you can not impute modern political motives to issues 30 years ago.
Anyway, I do not have the answer regarding Tara Reade.
But I do have ONE answer. you can not beleive Ford, and not Reade, you can not beleive the strongest of Trump accusers and not Reade.
You can disbeleive them all but if you are selective Reade’s claims are among the strongest.
As a separate aside whether Trump, or Biden or Weinstein or Clinton.
The common defense is to slur the victim – Hillary Clinton’s “Bimbo Eruptions”
It is also extremely common for preditors to target the vulnerable.
The incidence of rape harrasment, sexual assault is orders of magnitude higher among the very women who are least likely to be beleived.
Determining who to beleive is almost always incredibly difficult.
And often we will never know the truth.
But we can atleast not be hypocritical about it.
First of all Dave I will give you some credit, you have written some reasonable things about this, the other day in particular when you ranked Clinton trump and Biden in terms of their behaviors. I think you got that about right. In fact in the past you have been unimpressed with any of the accusations against trump, when did you change? But it is a sign of reason that you now admit that there is something up with trump.
My answer, I have heard enough to believe that Biden is very free with his hands. There are enough descriptions of that. In trumps case there are his own life long set of loudly broadcast statements. Those themselves make him unfit to be president and make it very easy to believe his accusers.
Tara Reade in no way made these accusations at the time. SHe made some vague accusations and now suddenly they are changing. Her comments on Biden have been mostly warm for many years.
And she has an agenda. And she is a flake. And the timing is very very suspicious. So…
Biden is by no means some giant hero of mine but he is the presumptive nominee, he is the voice of the most moderate electable part of the Dem party and I am not buying Tara Reade’s motives or constantly changing story.
I think Biden is in the range of that Minnesota comedian Ex-Senator guy (Forgot his Name!).
There is no real evidence at all here, the only thing that makes me believe any of it is that she is not the first to say these things about his wandering hands. I don’t like that behavior, no. But she has proved absolutely nothing. and can’t.
The allegations against Trump though numerous are HIGHLY variable in quality.
An enormous number of them have actually been adjudicated in court, and were patently absurd. Most seemed to be nothing more than people looking for a payday. These were people who did not know Trump and could not establish being in the same city with him at the same time.
To be clear that is not ALL Trump allegations – but it is MOST of the serious ones.
There is a disturbing relationship between Trump and Epstein.
But there is a disturbing relationship between Epstein and EVERYONE.
Of the long list of people too close to Epstein, Trump is one of the least and with the weakest relationship. Still being mentioned in the same breath with epstein is creepy.
Several of the more or less credible allegations against Trump, are essentially that he had consensual relations – and not particularly unusual ones. Daniels story about Trump is incredibly vanilla. i completely beleive Daniels (regarding Trump). I also beleive the female realestate developer who was having a consensual relationship with him. But she does not actually allege misconduct.
Sexual assault is nearly impossible to prove.
No Biden is not like Franken.
Franken’s conduct was inappropriate, but mostly not creepy,
Franken’s conduct was also LESS significant than most of what is alleged against Trump.
Most of the “touching” claims regarding Biden are creepy in a way those against Franken are not.
Another difference – Franken resigned.
I did not vote for Trump.
I specifically did not vote for Trump over his treatment of Women.
Just because I do not beleive every egregious allegation against him does not mean I beleive he is a role model or his treatment of women is decent.
I did not vote for Clinton. While she did not “sexually assault” women – her treatment of women is appalling.
I do not expect to vote for Trump in 2020. Nor am I likely to vote for Biden.
If their dealings with women are your criteria – there is no way you can vote for either without being a hypocrit.
I think you are personally overly hard on Tara Reade. But I do not have a problem with that.
So long as your standards are uniform.
Few of the allegations against Trump – and none of the serious ones would survive the same skeptical standards you apply to Reade.
Mostly there is nothing wrong with that standard – there is a reason we have statutes of limitation on crimes. And the Ford and Reade (and most of the Trump) allegations should explain that. We just can not go back 10, 20, 30, 40 years and litigate the vague past.
At the same time, I know real victims of sexual assault. They are not typically Martha McSally. Most of those – even powerful men who assault women are very good at targeting women. Either that have problems or will not be beleived.
Worse still sexual assualt fork’s up your life. Women who have been assaulted become alcoholics, promiscuous, go from one abusive relationship to another, often end up with lives that make Tara Reade look like a saint.
To be clear – some take back their lives. But the impact is forever.
Here is Turley on The Biden allegations.
Nothing I disagree with.
Here is Turley on the Biden Senate records and more importantly on the records of politicians while in office.
I fully agree. With very narrow exceptions the records of a politicians actions in office are government records – Public property. Not personal property.
Well now, they have two things in common.
1) Sexual Abuse
2) Hiding stuff in official records. Trump in taxes, Biden in congressional records.
Neither Trump’s nor anyone else’s taxes are a public record by any stretch.
But the records of politicians actions in office are.
I do support a narrow executive priviledge – limited to the direct communication between the president and advisors on options to deal with some problem.
I expect that when spitballing and brainstorming they might raise possibilities that we do not want to hear about. I do not want what was considered to be made public – otherwise, advisors will never say anything that they are unwilling to read in the NY Times.
But what is DONE is different.
Regardless, Executive priviledge is real but narrow. But within its domain it is absolute.
There is also a national security priviledge – that is broader but not infinite and it is not absolute. It is also time constrained. Nationala security does not preclude sharing information with congress. Though it might constrain with WHO in congress.
And I would prosecute members of congress for releasing classified information.
But the vast majority of what goes on in the executive branch is not subject to priviledge and it is NOT owned by the president.
Trumps personal – not official communications might be private, his christmas cards etc.
But his phone calls to foreign leaders are not.
Sexual harrassment claims against senators are NOT private records.
I do not think there was anything there in the Trump impeachment.
I do not think that the Senate should have allowed itself to be used to fix the botched job of the house.
I do beleive the house should have followed the rules for due process.
But I also beleive if Trump denied them documents and witnesses they should have gone to court to get them – not to the senate.
It is the courts job to sort those things out.
I think they do so badly, and I do not think they allow for enough oversite.
But that is a different issue
You can not impeach the president because the court will not give you what you want.
But the left will say “Trump wont share taxes”
Right will say “Biden wont share papers”
Neither media will go into legal issues.
To most voters, issues offset, move on
Biden’s papers are public records. Trump’s taxes aren’t.
There is some complexity – With Biden’s papers, Trump’s taxes are simple.
As a rule government investigations into allegations of misconduct ARE and SHOULD be private. Just because the government decided to investigate someone should not mean that their private life as uncovered by a government investigation is now public.
There are some tricky bits because a sexual harrassment allegation is not an allegation of a crime.
Still I am not sure that I am prepared to make the records of every allegation made against anyone else public.
That said. It is highly likely that if Read filed a complaint that she had a copy, and probably received a response. I would not presume this is over just because UoD will not open the records.
Further the Biden Camp has gone with an incredibly broad denial.
“No one ever has filed a harrassment claim against Biden” – absolutely completely unequivocal.
That will explode in their face very very badly if it is false.
Though Ball and others have noted that while the Biden Camp and numerous Biden Surpogates have been brutally denying this.
Biden has refused to answer any questions at all on it.
“ Well now, they have two things in common.
1) Sexual Abuse
What sexual abuse? Shoulder squeezing? Are you so desperate for negative Biden news to equate that with Donnie’s prolific penis philandering? Tsk tsk.
2) Hiding stuff in official records. Trump in taxes, Biden in congressional records.
The Congressional Records are records of Congressional HEARINGS, of the daily debates and proceedings. Do you think Biden made public remarks during Senate sessions about sexual assaults? The Republicans and their pals want those records for a different reason. To dig up and propagandize Biden Statements/positions going back 30 years on opposition on school busing for desegregation and his pro Clarance Thomas Views and his opposition to gay marriage – and try and pin those antiquated views on him now.
Jay, I have no idea what Biden did or did not do. But if he stuck his finger into her vagina, I think that sexual abuse and rape. And reports I heard was they want to see if a copy of this police report she claims she made is in any of the documents that he turned over.
My point was the media. Remember, the media on both sides picks and chooses information, edits it and then presents it to their readers as fact. Its fact only to a point, but most readers do not understand that. Most think when they read something it is 100% of the information. Not true.few actually research the subject.
Just today a friend from California posted an article about “why McConnell wants to bankrupt states”. It used many of his comments, but left out one critical statement, that being they wanted to help states with covid-19 expense and revenue issues, but did not want to bailout states with overspending from just budgetary issues unrelated to anything covid-19. So they covered it some, but left out a critical piece so it fit their narrative well.
So the right media and the left media will either attack the opposition with both issues during the election, or because both have this issue, nothing will be said.
” Shoulder squeezing?”
So it is OK with you for one person to squeeze the shoulder of a stranger without permission ? To fondle their hair ?
I am pretty sure most women would disagree. Is It OK if I grab, you are rub you and play in your hair ?
And yes, many of the allegations against trump are for exactly the same thing.
“Are you so desperate for negative Biden news to equate that with Donnie’s prolific penis philandering? Tsk tsk.”
No those things are not equivalent. Consensual sexual relations with another adult are an issue betwene Trump and Malania – not you.
Non consensual conduct is worse. And we have no idea if it is sexual or not.
Biden has handled lots of other mens wives.
“The Congressional Records are records of Congressional HEARINGS, of the daily debates and proceedings. Do you think Biden made public remarks during Senate sessions about sexual assaults? ”
Weird off the wall presumptions.
Tara Reade claims she reported Biden’s misconduct to several people, Including atleast 2 possibly 3 members of Biden’s staff. I beleive she also alleges that she reported it to the DNC and to the Senate Ethics committee.
“The Republicans and their pals want those records for a different reason. To dig up and propagandize Biden Statements/positions going back 30 years on opposition on school busing for desegregation and his pro Clarance Thomas Views and his opposition to gay marriage – and try and pin those antiquated views on him now.”
Republicans do not need his senate records for that – they have lots of video from CSPAN.
That is far more useful.
Regardless, UoD is not blocking the GOP,
They are blocking reporters. The same ones who worked on the Weinstein and other #metoo cases. These are NOT republican operatives. They are just honest DEMOCRAT investigative reporters who are following the story where it leads.
The Tara Reade Story is not mostly about Reade. It is not mostly about Biden.
It is about hypocracy. That of the media in particular and the left more generally.
It is about those who think that Christine Blasey Ford is a hero while Tara Reade is a goat.
It is not about Reade or Ford, but about how each of us reacts to each of their allegations.
There are no criticisms of Reade that do no apply equally to Ford, but the converse is not true.
You need not beleive Reade, but you can not beleive Ford and not Reade without drowning in hypocracy.
Jay;
Do you beleive the allegations against Weinstein ? Clinton ? Trump ?
Kavanaugh ?
I honestly do not care if you beleive Tara Reade.
The claim is old, and the best we can do is confirm that she reported it at the time.
But it is unlikely we will ever know the truth.
But Reade;s claim is several times more plausible than Dr. Ford’s.
It is also more plausible than most against Trump.
You have told me that I must beleive unsourced claims of sexual harrasment against Trump, Why must I reject a better claim against Biden ?
I do not know or pretend to know the truth regarding Reade.
What I do know is that Reade’s charges are being dealt with hypocritically – by the left, the media and YOU.
Anyone who beleives that Kavanaugh should not be on the supreme court because of Dr. Ford, must also reject Biden.
Anyone who beleives the allegations of sexual harrasment regarding Trump must beleive Reade too.
Otherwise you are a hypocrit.
So Jay – are you a hypocrit ?
“ Do you beleive the allegations against Weinstein ? Clinton ? Trump ?
Kavanaugh”
Do you believe little green creatures on Mars are bi-sexual?Your dumb question is just as irrelevant.
“ Anyone who beleives that Kavanaugh should not be on the supreme court because of Dr. Ford, must also reject Biden.‘
Anyone who believes Kavanaugh should be on the Supreme Court despite Ford must also believe the Biden accusation is irreverent. Duh.
“ But Reade;s claim is several times more plausible than Dr. Ford’s.”
Bullshit.
“ It is also more plausible than most against Trump.“
But FAR LESS credible than MANY of the charges against Trump. What kind of dunce (Guess whose name just popped into my head) equates a frivolous charge (for twenty years she only claimed he squeezed her shoulder (she suddenly revealed the finger-vagina-diddling recently) with 25 or more charges against the admitted Crotch-Grabber? You equate one Biden charge with dozens against Donnie? If I ask you to pick up A bushel of apples t the grocer and you bring one back, you going to say that’s equivalent?
Jay,
The USA Today article you cited attacking Reade,
Had a long list of points.
Every single one applied ATLEAST as well to Ford.
If Ford’s allegation disqualifies Kavanaugh – then Reads Disqualifies Biden and probably the allegations against Trump disquallify him.
But NO the alleagations against Trump are not stronger.
Have you read anyone of them ?
One woman has alleged the same crime in 3 different parts of the country.
At specific times when Trump was PUBLICLY somewhere else.
Another admits to being in a sexual relationship with trump at the time, and that what she said was “Not Here, Not Now” and Trump complied. That is probably the most credible allegation against him. It is also the most damning to his detractors.
It is pretty well established that Trump was a “horn dog”.
He was a sexually agressive alpha male. But the evidence todate is that he took “NO” to mean “NO!”.
Biden does not have a reputation as an “alpha male”, his long history is closer to that of “creepy uncle joe” The family Pedo, who you do not leave alone with your daughter.
The Reade story is slightly problematic because Biden’s behavior is more Trumplike and less consistent with the other allegations against Biden.
I do not care precisely how you weigh the evidence regarding Reade.
I just care that you apply the same standard to others.
You do not.
There are lots of problems with Reade.
Guess what – Victims are RARELY perfect.
Real victims, do not come forward, tell inconsistent stories, lie, have ulterior motives,
and on and on.
And those who lie about this kind of thing – and they exist too, are difficult if not impossible to distinguish from actual victims.’
This is one of the reasons we have “statutes of limitation”
Regardless, All I ask is that you are consistent.
Your not.
Why is that not surprising.
Ford alleges that a drunken teenage Kavanaugh fell on her in a bed, and groped her breasts through her cloths, at a party that was almost 40 years ago and none of the people Ford alleges were there recall the party or even that all of them were together concurrently.
Ford can not place the date or even the year, or the location and other facts about the event that she alleges are inconsistent with facts that we can test.
If Ford’s allegation is true – it is less substantive that Reades.
In fact the substance of Ford’s allegation is “a drunk boy fell on me and I felt threatened”.
If true it is not a crime. Even the claim she was “groped” with her cloths on is highly subjective.
Ford did not tell anyone at the time – or for decades afterwords.
Reade’s “public telling” of the of the story has grown over time, but she did tell people at the time the event occured – many of whom confirm the allegation.
Further short of video her mothers Larry King call in is pretty strong.
It is CONTEMPORANEOUS, it is within a year of the event. The call reinforces Reade’s claim she reported this, and the call is not political, or whacko or whatever.
It is a simple request for justice and an observation that the powerful are projected.
Biden is not named, Politics is not mentioned. There is nothing about Russia or horses or ….
Only an “influential senator” – the call is not personal. It is not an attack on Biden, it is a cry for justice.
As to Trump’s accusers – there are many, most were after money, and long ago lost in court – because at times contemporaeous with events they could not get past the low bar of summary judgement against them.
The most credible allegation against Trump was the one I refered to – “Not Here, Not now”.
The allegation is that alpha Trump responded to “n o” by stopping.
Pretty damming.
Then there is a left wing nut who claims that she had sex with Trump in a dressing room.
Her story changes constantly, and in interviews she is pretty nuts, but only in some retellings is the sex not completely consensual, and ultimately there is the problem that as sbhe describes the event there would be others that can corroborate details. But we can not get Trump anywhere near the store in question at the time of the event.
Are some of these allegations against Trump true ?
I do not know. Just as I do not know if Reade’s allegation is True or ford’s is.
But on a scale of credibility – all have problems, but Ford’s story and some of the Trump allegations are the weakest, and Reade’s is among the strongest.
Though a few of the allegations regarding Trump are stronger – they are just not crimes.
Trump’s infidelity with Daniels is pretty solidly established. But philandering is not a crime, and Daniels is clear, nothing unwanted happened, and nothing particularly strange either.
In fact Trump’s sexual conduct was incredibly vanilla.
I also beleive the woman in real estate. But that was again part of a consensual relationship, and Trump took no for an answer.
There are LOTS of women who have alleged Trump had relationships with them.
So!
If you want me to reject Reade and accept some claim about Trump – find a credible claim regarding Trump that is stronger than Reade.
Regardless, end the hypocracy. The evidence of the #metoo moment is that there are far more creepy lefties than anyone imagined.
So it is numbers that matter ?
So I guess you bought Julie Swetnick’s allegation ?
There are LOTS of allegations of innappropriate contact regarding Biden over DECADES.
There are not at this time lots of allegations of sexual assault.
John Say: “ Facebook, Twitter and Youtube are taking down the posts and pages of any groups seeking to protest the shutdown orders of governors.”
So? Is there a law against that? What happened to your insistence owners have the right to control what appears in their own media?
“Is there a law against that ?”
There actually is. The DMCA protects content providers from liability for content that is posted in return for providing an open public forum.
Put simply FB, Twitter, Youtube, can not be sure for copyright infringement, or defamation or any other claims regarding the content they host
SO LONG AS they provide a “Neutral public platform” – i.e. they abide by the same first amendment criteria as govenrments must.
Personally I think that the entire DMCA should be struck as unconstitutional.
Content providers should be allowed to censor as they please, and they should be subject to copyright claims and libel actions – just like the rest of us.
Most of these will be easily dissmissed – and that is appropriate.
But it is estimated that the DMCA saves google about $8B in legal fees per year.
That is not losses, that is just the costs to defend against claims that the DMCA precludes.
I do not have that legal protection, nor do you. That seems to me a clear violation of equal protection of the law.
Regardless, by availing themselves of that protection, Google, FB, Twitter subject themselves to the requirements of a neutral public platform.
They clearly are not.
Either they must stop censoring based on viewpoint or they are not entitled to DMCA protections.
By law it is NOT their own media. that is precisely the point of the DMCA, and it is why they are protected from copyright and defamation claims.
If they do not excercise editorial control they can not be held responsible for content.
Because it is NOT THEIR CONTENT.
If as you claim it is THEIRS – they are as you assert free to control it.
But if they control it they they are excercising editorial powers – they are expressing a view point and they are as subject to defamation claims as NYT or WaPo.
The papers and news shows are free to pick and choose what content they include or exclude – they have editorial control, and they are responsible for that content.
Social media can not both excercise control and have no responsibility for the choices they make.
This is NOT the free market.
I am all for google having as much editorial control as it wants.
AND RESPONSIBILITY for it.
You clearly have zero understanding of much of what I have ever said – even though it is relatively simple.
Absolutely Google should have control of the services it provides.
AND responsibility for them.
Next, there is an enormous gulf between what one has the right to, and immunity from criticism.
Any of us who are not infective with Covid19 – or have been infected and are likely immune are free to go about our lives as we please – short of harming others. Government use of force to compell us otherwise is immoral and probably unconstitutional in any reasonable understanding of the constitution.
But the fact that you have the right to behave stupidly does not mean I will not criticism you for doing so.
Social media (nor anyone else) should have the “special protections” that are in the DMCA – those two are unconstitutional.
Google is and should be free to excercise editorial control of content.
And it is libel for that content if it does so.
And whether there is meaningful liability it is definitely subject to criticism.
We now litterally have social media censoring posts because they conflict with sources that have a track record of ERROR.
Excellent article! Might not agree 100%, but for the most part.
Another example of the crabs in the “loss of rights” warming waters.
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/29/in-covid-19-america-freedom-is-treated-as-a-privil/
Good article.
Ultimately I think Covid19 and the government response is going to cause lots of people to rethink what freedom means and what rights they are prepared to cede to govenrment in return for the pretense of protection.
At this time protests are small, and mostly fringe or fringish.
But the longer this continues the greater the impetus to challenge government will be.
Yesterday my wife and I went for a long walk. Our state requires face masks when outside.
We each took a mask in our pockets. We did not wear them.
Along the walk we met neighbors in their yards and others walking. No one had masks on.
But we all stayed at a distance – though we smiled said hello and kabitz a little.
Put simply NO ONE was obeying the governor.
We all made our own judgements – and we all DID act to stay safe – REASONABLY.
We did not need edicts from the capital. And we increasingly resent them.
Regardless, we are in the midst of a global experiment.
Different countries, different states, different counties are handling this differently.
There is some rational basis for that – NYC is not podunk.
But we should fairly quickly see the results.
Myriads (left and right) have predicted a second wave as China relaxes restrictions and goes back to work. Many of us WANT a 2nd wave in china to punish Xi. But regardless of our emotional response, thus far the only evidence of increase in China is along the border with Russia where Covid19 is trying to RE-ENTER. There is so far no 2nd wave in china.
That is important. While there is a fairly large amount of evidence this disease is more contagious than beleived, there is also evidence that it is easily thwarted.
If that were not the case – China would have a 2nd wave.
Further it has clear behavior observed accross the world. That behavior is pretty close to constant – immutable. Contra our “experts” recomendations, the evidence is that it does NOT spread to 100% of the population, and that “lockdowns” do NOT result in different outcomes.
The jury is out on the effects of voluntary social distancing.
But there is pretty strong evidence this disease thrives in crowded conditions and spreads slowly if at all in sparse populations.
There is a difference between the observed behavior of the virus and speculation about the cause of that behavior.
Robby chastized me earlier for being “overly optomistic”. It is not “optomistice” to beleive something will behave as it has in the past, even though I do not know the cause of that behavior.
It is pessimism to beleive that behavior will worsen without some obvious change.
Many approaches have been tried on Covid19. We have enough evidence to make decisions with a reasonable probability of being right.
Even without knowing WHY.
As more and more states, communities, countries relax lockdowns, so long as the curve remains flat, the pressure on those who have not will heighten rapidly and substantially.
If on the otherhand those places relaxing restrictions face a pronounced 2nd wave – those pushing extreme caution will be vindicated.
The evidence strongly suggests the former, not the latter.
Question Re Flynn:
Did he or didn’t he lie? To the VP? & Under oath? And admit it?
And what kind of American military hero shoves his snout into the Russian oligarchy Feed bowl?
And what happened to Trump’s audited taxes 4 years AFTER he promised to release them?
And how’s that assurance Mexico was paying for the Wall going?
And how’s his flip-flip-flip … flop-flop-flopping on reopening the states effecting his poll numbers?
Jay, we are all aware of that.
It has been discussed to death.
In 2018 Mueller was still SC. Flynn had every reason to beleive – exactly as he did when he agreed to the guilty plea in the first place, that if he did not do as Van Grack demanded,
that Mueller and his team would further destroy him and his son.
Are you saying that after having been bankrupted trying to assert your innocence, and after the Prosecutors went after your family that you would not be willing to strike a deal ?
There is zero doubt at this point that NOT only was Flynn setup.
But that the ONLY lie he has told, was pleading guilty.
If you are saying Flynn lied to the FBI – then you can state with precision and accuracy what that lie was.
Todate no one has been able to do so. There is no FBI 302 that says “Flynn said X and X was untruthful”. There is contemporaneous emails and texts from the FBI demonstrating their goal was to set Flynn up – to get him to lie, and there is similar emails and texts afterwards saying that Flynn told the truth.
So what is the lie Flynn told ?
And more. The FBI was preparing to Close the investigation of Flynn in early January, When Strzock at the direction of McCabe and Comey intervened.
There was one and only one purpose for the Strzok interview of Flynn and that was to entrap him.
I would note as i did long ago. 18 USC 1001 DOES NOT APPLY when the misinformation provided does not misdirect the investigation.
So here we have a closed investigation – but for the “7th floor of the FBI intervening.
We have a Russian transcript – that the FBI has – so there is no possibility they could be mislead, and an interview setup – not to gain information that the FBI does not already have,
but for the sole purpose of entrapping Flynn.
Need I repeat – these people HATED FLYNN – more than Trump.
McCabe had a personal axe to grind with Flynn and was ethically obligated to recuse himself from matters involving Flynn – instead he was one of the leaders of the charge to “get Flynn”.
These are despicable people.
You fixate on whether Flynn told a lie you can not even identify.
LEts have the FBI tear up your life. Wire Tap you and anyone related to you, and see if they can find any mistatements or mistakes you have made – or if not, to drag you in and see how long it takes them to get you to make a mistake.
Law enforcement is not their to create crimes.
There is a SCOTUS oppinion by Ginsburg on exactly why this is wrong.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/fbi-found-no-derogatory-russia-evidence-flynn-planned
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/people-need-to-pay-for-this-nikki-haley-sounds-off-on-shameful-treatment-of-michael-flynn-following-release-of-fbi-documents
“Did he or didn’t he lie?”
No.
Please identify the SPECIFIC lie.
“To the VP?”
No
What is known is that the FBI tapped conversations of Pence’s staffers, and in one of those conversations, some staffer said that sanctions did not come up in the Flynn call.
Sanctions were raised by Kislyack towards the end of the call and brushed off by Flynn.
We do not KNOW what Flynn said to Pence.
And even if we did, it would be reasonable for Flynn to say that Sanctions were not discussed.
“Under oath?”
no
Flynn’s has never been under oath.
“And admit it?”
Are you saying that every single person coerced into a guilty plea is guilty ?
Next, what is absolutely beyond any doubt clear is that myriads of people – including the Mueller team and the Flynn Prosecutor and the FBI agents and Yates and Comey and McCabe
HAVE LIED.
Sometimes to the press, often under oath, often to the court, often to other federal agents – like the president, and vice president.
Just incase you are clueless 18 USC 1001 covers all lies told to ANY federal agent.
If the director of the FBI lies to the president of the united States – that would fall under 18 USC 1001 in the same way as anything Flynn said to Strzok.
“And what kind of American military hero shoves his snout into the Russian oligarchy Feed bowl?”
Flynn did not. He did engage with Russians. He did so with the knowledge of the US intelligence community. He did so in cooperation with them.
He was briefed before and after every encounter.
“And what happened to Trump’s audited taxes 4 years AFTER he promised to release them?”
Are you saying Flynn at them ?
“And how’s that assurance Mexico was paying for the Wall going?”
Your responding to a comment about Flynn. Not Trump.
“And how’s his flip-flip-flip … flop-flop-flopping on reopening the states effecting his poll numbers?”
Do I care ?
Our executive presidential Duo: Dumb, and Dumber..
https://theweek.com/cartoons/911663/editorial-cartoon-mike-pence-coronavirus-mask
I love cartoons.
I like them to be funny.
Biden’s Accuser Accused:
View at Medium.com
Collapse. Next.
A series of prog women trying to undo Biden based on metoo is as inevitable as a series of thugs attempting to wack Jackie Chan in any of his movies. This whole case will work to Biden’s credit and I hope it will work against the next prog nut job who thinks there is still a path to getting Bernie in by metoo. There are believable accusations and then there are accusations that collapse. Each accusation with political implications is going to need to be looked at based on its merits, some will have merits. This one obviously is too shaky to stand. But Reade will have a gofund me up in a day asking for money her distress.
Reade already has a gofundme – you did not read the article. It has 3500 in it.
Ford’s gofundmen raised $2M, McCabes has $4M.
They get to keep that money.
There are lots of problems with Reade.
But there are less problems with Reade than with Ford or the Trump accusers.
I have little problem with your deciding you do not beleive Reade.
If you also do not beleive Ford, or the assorted Trump accusers.
And I could give a rats ass about this idiocy from “Pregnant Mare Rescue”.
All that is, is good reason not to get involved in the vile people that are involved in charities.
To the extent that looks bad for Reade, it is because she involved herself with these petty smarmy people.
Any group that wants to piss all over volunteers for this kind of petty and highly subjective allegations, is not one I want anything to do with.
Nor does it surprise me much. I have unfortunately had to deal with Dog Rescue organizations, and wonder how such repugnant people can b e involved in such good causes.
My wife had to threaten to sue on Dog rescue because they were going to destroy a dog rather than return it to its owner, after it escaped with a dead battery in its GPS tag.
Yep, taking the play book used by the GOP during the Cavanaugh hearings. Instead of proving the accusation is false, attack the accuser and make them look untrustworthy.Christine Ford could have told Tara Reade everything that was going to happen.
Do I know for a fact if either of these happened or did not. No I don’t because no one pursued the issue for any reason other than political positioning.
Does anyone question why women hide sexual assault? Even now, with changes made, if a woman accuses a man, especially a high profile man, of sexual assault, its not the man that is guilty. Its the woman being vindictive, gold digger, etc, etc.
And this will never change until men become as upset with the issue as the women who get attacked.
Right now that is not happening. Men just say she is a prostitute, she deserved what she got, she was being provocative and all the other terms used for decades. These men are not any better than the men in the middle east that abuse their women for their own pleasure.
A prostitute? No something worse, a progressive!
And how, Ron, do you propose to verify her accusation? Perhaps she has video?
There is no possible proof; therefore this rests almost entirely on her believability and whether she has told a consistent story.
OK, the narrative that the left get hoisted on their petard is going to be irresistible to the right. In this case, Tara Reade is not going to deliver that pleasant narrative to the right.
Ford had credibility and most reasonable people believe that Something happened to her, but many reasonable people also think she has an inaccurate memory of what it was, while being sincere.
Tara Reade now appears to be a manipulative wacko. Her timing stinks and she has several very likely motives to blow this up into something much larger than she has ever previously claimed.
You are welcome to send her some gofundme dollars if you truly sympathize.
In the real world Tara Reade has as much problems proving her story as every other similar allegation for actions many years ago. And sometimes even the allegations of people who were assaulted recently.
As to some of your questions:
Would you view her story more credibly if documentation that she reported these actions to the DNC to the Senate, … showed up ?
It is possible she is lying and never reported this.
It is also perfectly possible she did and it was buried.
It is not like that is uncommon – especially in the 90’s.
There is not going to be video of the incident.
In the end there will be lots of information pro and con.
And you will have to make up your own mind.
So long as you do so consistently – you have no problem with me.
But please do not try to tell me that Reade is less credible than either Trump’s accusers or Ford ?
I personally choose to beleive all of them, and none of them.
Because in the end we can not know.
Do you actually read the things you link to ?
This is a bunch of petty bickering inside a charity.
Have you never had anything to do with a charity ?
This kind of stuff goes on all the time.
I avoid charities for specifically this reason.
And Oh, My god Reade must be guilty of something because she has a 3500 Gofundme account.
McCabe has a $4M one, and I beleive Fords was atleast 2M.
Regardless, if I am giving to a charity – I send them money.
If I give time – I do it on my own.
I stay as far as possible from exactly the kind of stuff that was going on at PMR for exactly the reasons in this article.
These people are always throwing these kinds of allegations at each other.
This is not just nonsense, it is incredibly petty nonsense.
And you wonder why women do not come forward ?
Because some idiot will attack them over vet bills.
And Here’s Donnie: in Presidential Excretion Mode
Well, he is a stable genius, so we must make allowances for how hard it is for him to deal with others less gifted. Poor man, he must feel like he is surrounded by idiots at his level of IQ.
As an example, https://www.thewrap.com/did-the-onion-predict-trumps-suggestion-about-disinfectants-to-treat-coronavirus/
I linked the clip of Trump’s exact remarks here.
You can go listen to them.
I think the claim by Trump that they were Sarcasm is obviously false.
But any claim that he suggested injecting bleach of lysol is equally false.
It is likely this are an oversimplified reference to an analogy that Birx presented to him privately – you will note in the clip he keeps returning to Birx in the midst of the remarks.
He is clearly asking her to explain what he is saying.
Regardless, this is much ado about nothing.
Presumably you know what Chemo therapy is.
Or have heard of using Arsenic or mercury as medicine.
Is there something Trump said that is not self evidently True ?
Do I need to play some Clips of these people straight faced crazy lying ?
Absolutely if you accuse someone else of lying – as YOU have done many times.
You had better be able to prove it.
Do you think Trump would have any trouble doing so ?
How are you doing with that “Carter Page is a Russian Agent” nonsense ?
And how is the “Putin helped Trump in 2016” nonsense going ?
I still believe there is a good chance that Biden will not be nominated using some underhanded way to eliminate him and draft Hillary.
God Grief, If you are serious about Hillary being nominated, I am withdrawing the assumption of your basic sanity that I have always previously made.
Typo, that s Good grief, no religious implications intended.
Andrew Cuomo
Michelle Obama
Hillary Clinton
Michelle probably the best choice, but would she want it? Hilliary still has roots deep into the party and she won the popular vote, probably could swing three states she needed in 2016 and her baggage is old news. Could Cuomo appeal to those that Hillary lost?
But I am seeing more info on the Dems trying to get away from Biden because they fear 1) His developing inability to effectively communicate and 2) women bailing on him in enough numbers to negatively impact the election.
The accusation dont need to be true, just enough voters need to believe them to impact his gotes.
The big thing the Reade Allegation – combined with all the other “creepy joe” stuff over decades does, is deprives Biden of a potent attack on Trump.
The answer to any Biden attack on Trump’s relations with Women is “Tara Reade” and lots of “Creepy Joe”.
Further both of them are old enough I do not think it is going their heavily.
Oddly 2020 is turning out to be 2012 redeaux.
Romeny was “Obama lite”.
In myriads of ways Biden is “Trump lite”.
Many of their strenghts and weaknesses are shared.
That is a receipe for victory by the incumbent.
Never underestimate the ambition or evil of Hillary Clinton.
Nor the power she has inside the democratic party.
I think this is unlikey.
But I think there is a chance that Biden’s campaign collapses in a way we have never seen before.
I feel very sorry for Biden.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I saw this on FB today. It’s a quote from CS Lewis, the author of Chronicles of Narnia. I don’t know if I totally agree with it or not, but it strikes a chord, and I think that the politicians better find a way to get this country opened up ( I’ll give Cuomo and Murphy a little extra time, given that NY and NJ are FUBAR) or I’m afraid we are going to be seeing some dark times.
Somewhere in “On Liberty” Mill said much the same thing.
He said that an evil monarch was less dangerous than democracy.
No tyrant has the time or ability to fork over or mess with your life in the way that your neighbor can.
Tyrants care about their own power. They really do not have much interest in forking over ordinary people.
There is no limits to the ways in which your neighbor can tell you how to run your life better.
So very interesting this discussion that Jay opened with the post concerning Bidens accuser accused and I responded about taking women serious.
Interesting responses to say the least. Seems to support why women don’t come forward many times.
For some reason all your videos come back “unavailable” on my Amazon Fire Tablet.
Wow! So youtube is now censoring “The rising” ?
This is pretty amazing.
The rising is a “cross fire” like show hosted by “the Hill”
It has two young hosts – One is supposed to be “the left” the other “the right”.
But both of them are left of center. At the same time they are intelligent, and
in comparison to most of the media today, they are honest, consistent and have ethics.
They have been the prominent outlet on the left doing critical coverage of Biden.
They have actually had Tara Reade on the show. And Krystal Ball one of the Shows hosts, has been strongly taking the left to task for buying Ford but attacking Reade.
Anyway, this was a clip from one of the episodes of “the Rising”.
And Youtube has apparently censored it.
So we now have the left censoring the left for …. What ?
I can not get the clip myself to verify what Ball said that offended the censors at Youtube.
I guess you can’t say anything negative about Biden now.
So its not my device after all?
In this case the clip was pulled. I am pretty sure the clip was from “the rising”.
I have no idea why it would have been pulled.
It is not like “the rising” is alex jones and infoworld, or even Fox. They are big sanders supporters,
But they are pretty smart and mostly not hypocritical.
And very good at calling out hypocracy on the left.
Someone probably clicked on something to report it and instead of reviewing it, they just accepted it as objectionable material
Excellent article by Matt Taibbi.
I have some minor issues, but nothing worth raising.
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/temporary-coronavirus-censorship
Some things I would note. We have nutcases like these two law professors arguing nonsense. The debate over free speech was had and won long ago. I have heard no new arguements that transform the debate, only the same tired old arguments by new people who are credentialed and degreed and yet know less than the ordinary man on the street. Regardless, they are clearly completely ignorant that there ever was any side to the debate aside from their own. I would say they should read Mill. I am sure they have not. And more certain they would not dream of doing so. They know they are right. Why bother to read a 200 year old essay that destroy’s the foundations of their arguments.
But what is more important is not these two whack jobs but the extent of the influence of them and others like them.
Robby and Jay will claim they are not encamp with this fringe loons. But they make permutations of the same tired arguments and more importantly they go along as we slowly march toward 1984.
And they wonder why the country is bitterly divided ?
But beyond these two professors and their ideas on speech which are unfortunately way to broadly shared. After all Google and Twitter and Facebook ARE censoring the internet – in exactly the way this idiots desire.
Beyond them I would ask – them, those on the left, those who say they are not on the left but seem to have no problem with much of what the most extreme on the left wish to do.
I would ask – how do you cope with being WRONG so much ?
Trump DID win in 2016.
Russia DID actually help Clinton rather than Trump.
Carter Page WAS a CIA/FBI assent – not a Russian one
As was Flynn who WAS framed.
These are all sort of Trump related issues – but there are innumerable others.
PPACA may not have been the absolute total disaster that some on the right portrayed.
But there is no way it can be characterized as a success. It has been a disaster.
On these and many many other things you have not only been WRONG, but you have been OBVIOUSLY wrong. The entire Trump.Russia nonsense NEVER EVER made any sense to anyone with a brain. This is not a Right/Left claim. This is a Fact/Fantasy issue. No one could possibly be so brilliant as to get away with Russian Collusion and simultaneously so stupid as to engage in it. Like so much that Taibbi is mentioning you must presume that those you are attacking are universally idiot savants.
One of my nitts regarding Taibbi’s article is his conclusion the Bakersfeild doctors are wrong.
After spending several pages properly noting the failure of experts, he defers to them at odds with the facts.
One of the problems with experts and expertise is that when reality does not conform to their expectations or expertise – it is reality that must be wrong.
Experts, science, all have limits. There is far more that we do not know than that we know.
One of the recurring themes of this Covid19 pandemic is “We just do not know”.
I will credit “the experts” with doing their best. In most instance I do not presume malice of political objectives on their part. But they have been repeatedly wrong – nearly uiniversally wrong from the start. Again, being wrong is neither a sin, or a crime – and to confront Jay in advance directly, it is also not a LIE. But failing to learn that is more serious than merely being wrong.
As I have said REPEATEDLY we know have pretty good data from across the world. It all tells the same story – with few exceptions there is no difference in outcome associated with different approaches to Covid19.
It does appear that vigilance at the border can stop Covid19. Most countries blew that. Taiwan did not.
It does appear that a rapid response and massive testing can choke this early on in countries that are small, like South Korea.
It does appear that countries with poor healthcare systems are going to have higher death rates.
It does appear that dense populations will have higher death rates.
It does appear that older populations will have higher death rates.
It does appear that unhealthy populations will have higher death rates.
But there is zero evidence that lockdowns work.
The case for social distancing is stronger but far from certain.
For the most part with the exception of a few variables that are outside the control of countries by the time Covid19 hits there doorstep there is nothing that a government can do to alter the outcome.
There is no statistically significant difference in outcome between Sweden, The UK, TX, FL, and MI.
Robby, you are right my speculation as to why that is so is probably optomism
But it is a FACT that it is so. That is NOT optomism.
Arrest that sexual deviant:
No, stop defending or attacking her
Stop defending or attacking him.
Investigate and come to the best conclusion possible.
Then let voters decide.
Same with Cavanaugh.
I did investigate and came to correct conclusions.
Trump is a divisive asshole and an obnoxious lech who admitted it.
Biden is an ameliorating decent man whose worst deviancies are spontaneous hugs and cheek kisses.
I’m taking Hillary’s advice and voting for Biden.
Ok Jay. So have you given that investigative report to the media so they can review it, come to their conclusions and report itso this issue can be concluded?
“I did investigate”
Nope, and that is obvious by your remarks.
When you do not draw the same conclusions from the same conduct you are not acting on facts and logic, you are making decisions based on emotions and biases.
Your own video demonstrates Biden’s problem.
The women in the clip opened up and telegraphed exactly what she was doing. She made an offer to people she did not know, and most of them accepted – to different degrees of awkwardness. Regardless, she got non-verbal consent from all of them, and they all knew what was coming beforehand and had the opportunity to accept or decline.
That is NOT true of Biden. And you know that.
If Either Biden or Trump did that with my daughter or wife, they would be maced and have a kick in their crotch.
Hillary can be provided with an orange pantsuit.
Yes, I have problems with her Behavior. BUT it is still not the same as that of Franken or Biden or allegations regarding Trump.
In most of Jay’s clip she communicated clearly what she was doing and got a non-verbal “yes” before contact.
You do not have the right to touch, feel, grope, stroke or even hug another person.
you can do so by agreement.
All agreement is not verbal or written.
Biden comes up behind women and children. There is no question he does not have there permission. Quite frequently you get video with very surpised reactions – especially from teens. Because they do not expect his actions and they are not yet mature enough to hide in public their discomfort.
President Prognostications Revisited:
Donald Trump:
Feb. 10: “Looks like by April…when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away…I really believe they are going to have it under control fairly soon.”
So you have a problem that Trump is saying the same thing many of the experts are saying ?
Faucci has confirmed this is likely Seasonal (like all other colds and flu’s and coronavirus’s).
FL and TX have been hit less than NYC,
The southern hemisphere less than the northern.
But this is ebbing in the northern hemisphere and there is some evidence it is starting to strengthen in the southern.
And that is why we likely need to prepare for its return next Fall.
Do you really believe Fauci? He said in January nothing to worry about. He said on CNN Jan 26th, nothing to worry about in USA. He said in early February in USA today interview there is no human to human transmission, don’t worry. Then all of a sudden, he says that 2M Americans could die, then he says a few days later 200,000 could die, which the next day Birx says in the range of 60-80K.
This guy is throwing crap into the air and whatever hits the target he goes with it.
Fauci “considers himself a no-nonsense fact-finder, a servant of science” . Bull crap, he is like most all other government officials, totally incompetent and probably one of the main reasons the administration acted late on doing anything.
When your supposedly smartest person tells the nation “don’t worry” then you DON”T WORRY. When your smartest advisor says there is no human to human transmission then you BELIEVE THERE IS NO HUMAN TO HUMAN TRANSMISSION. When your smartest person says 2M could die,PEOPLE PANIC AND DRINK FISH TANK CHEMICALS,
Trump is stuck with the ass that farts ideas into the air and if he catches them, that’s his next prognostication. He can’t fire him because the left wing press would go bonkers because he is their fair hair child.
“Do I beleive Faucci ?”
Complex question.
But lets start from the other end.
I am not going into full blown Trump is a science denying liar mode, when Trump’s remarks are nothing more than dumbed down versions of Faucci, Brix or other “experts”.
The purpose of my comment was to demonstrate there was nothing stupid about Trump’s remark.
I do not beleive or disbeleive Faucci any more than any other Expert.
I think they are wrong most of the time.
I do not fault them for that.
It is the nature of working with crappy information.
To the extent I “fault” those in power – and that is ALL of them.
It is because they have taken the crappy information that they have been given, and flipped from very early overly optimistic to completely paranoid pessimism.
Honestly I do not have any problem with the opinions of ANY of the experts in this,
What I have a problem with is this nonsense that we can convert an expert opinion into FORCE.
It is not legitimate for those “experts” who have managed to negotiate to the top of the pyramid of government to dictate to all of us.
It is OUR task to sort out the views of competing experts and apply our own judgement to our own lives.
Dave, Fauci is the doctor you go to because you feel bad and this happens.
“There is nothing wrong with you, dont worry”
A week goes by and you go back, tell him you still feel bad.
” Really, we checked all your symptom complaints, and nothing is wrong. Dont worry”
Another two weeks pass and you get a phone call.
“Dave, this is Doc, Bad news, you have X and you have 3 months to live. ”
So after the shock, you liquidate all assets, you go on a 30 day vacation to Europe, you buy a Ferrari to drive in Europe, you spend money like water threw a hose and when leaving, you give the car to the local church for charity. Now you have little funds left.
When you get home, there is a message.
“Dave, this is the doc, made a mistake, you have much longer to live, but the pain will increase to really high levels.”
So you decide if it is going to be that painful, you buy street drugs that could have deadly impurites but could care less, going to die anyway.
Two days later, “Dave, this is doc, what is wrong with you wont kill you and the pain will only be a small amount I thought previously”.
Finally you get a call. “Dave, just be careful and stay separated from people, follow a few rules and you will get through this, but it could come gack in a couple months”
Now, who in their right mind would continue listening to this quack?
There is alot of truth in your remarks regarding Faucci – but many other “experts” have said the same thing.
Further frankly in his and their defense – the number of unknows has been ENORMOUS.
I have generally been consistently optomistic from the start.
I have been wrong on occasions. This has been worse than I expected.
That said, being optomistic has resulted in my being right more often that wrong.
Further I have been right more often than Faucci.
What is the difference ? Absolutely he knows more, he is more expert.
But I have had a couple of traits pretty much universally – not just on Covid19.
I do not buy mathusian prognostications.
Anyone who wraps themself in the mantle of “science” and then utters doom and gloom,
Does not understand the fundimentals of science and specifically of life on this planet.
The PRESUMPTION mus be that as harsh as nature is, she still favors small disasters over large. That end of the world scenarios are incredibly unlikely – BECAUSE THE WORLD IS STILL HERE. The odds must favor that or it would not be so.
The next is faith in free people to solve their own problems.
This has been bad. No doubt. Though frankly government has made it FAR WORSE.
I do think that distinctions between FL and NY will tell us that some measures actually worked. Florida did a far better job of protecting the elderly. And there are actually differences in policy that likely are the cause of those differences.
But aside from a few minor things like that.
Nothing government has done has had a positive effect. I think the evidence is compelling that in the US the number of deaths would be the same if govenrment had done nothing.
They would have occurred faster. That is all.
Further the economy was going to be kicked in the ass no matter what.
There would be less people dining out, going to the theater. we would all CHOOSE to go out less and buy less. Some businesses would be massacred no matter what.
But probably 70% of the economic carnage has been government induced.
And to no demonstrable benefit.
I really hope that Covid19 is dying off – because it has infected as many people as it can.
Because if it is seasonal. We have only a short period of time to learn how stupidly we have responded. And do better next time. And the first step is LESS Government.
At the same time – markets stepped up shortages of PPE and TP and sanitizer are shortlived and small. We are now drowning in ventalators, which appear to be mostly useless anyway.
Whatever we needed, free markets delivered. Not instantly. But soon enough.
And I expected that from the begining.
The problem with ALL the experts is they know way too much about their own narrow field and way to little abotu FUNDIMENTAL principles of science, human nature and economics.
Faucci did NOT both his recomendations on Covid19 based on the crappy information he had at the time.
He botched things by over reacting to his earlier failures of optimism.
The difference between every single experts oppinion over the past serveral months is NOT the information or data. It is how they took really crappy data and drew conclusions.
There is little cost – particularly in government for being overly cautious.
In the real world the precautionary principle KILLS.
Wise decisions require “skin in the game”
Those in government do not have that.
https://apnews.com/aec7beb03e9e0e0e6e3c58111293e0ea
Apparently you and AP do not know what sexual harrasment is.
Reade says she used the words “uncomfortable” and retaliatorty.
Are you accepting that Reade filed a complaint ?
We do not know the truth. But there are really only 3 reasons someone actually files a complaint.
Retaliation. Leverage or reward – they have been fired or expect to be fired and are looking to either prevent or benefit.
Seeking attention.
Because someone did something bad.