jamestroll
jamespol
Atlas Icon
Posts: 10,532
|
|
« Reply #50 on: November 18, 2020, 11:29:14 AM » |
|
I'm not sure if "I'm 100% right and you're all privileged and rich brats" is a strong concluding argument.
What I stated is literally true. I just feel like the people here who support stringent lockdowns have like no income to lose or aren't in any danger of evictions, etc. I am not in any danger of that either if there was a stringent shut down. But you can scream 100,000 times that there should be a stimulus. But .. there is not a stimulus right now.. so we have to focus on mitigation measures rather than stringent lockdowns. Why is the anger directed towards me when until recently, I supported greater mitigation measures than almost any Democratic governor? Throw the anger on your governors. Not me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jamestroll
jamespol
Atlas Icon
Posts: 10,532
|
|
« Reply #53 on: November 18, 2020, 11:54:34 AM » |
|
I'm not sure if "I'm 100% right and you're all privileged and rich brats" is a strong concluding argument.
What I stated is literally true.
I just feel like the people here who support stringent lockdowns have like no income to lose or aren't in any danger of evictions, etc. I am not in any danger of that either if there was a stringent shut down. But you can scream 100,000 times that there should be a stimulus. But .. there is not a stimulus right now.. so we have to focus on mitigation measures rather than stringent lockdowns.
Why is the anger directed towards me when until recently, I supported greater mitigation measures than almost any Democratic governor? Throw the anger on your governors. Not me.
I just think it’s a failure to act on our government’s side. Lockdowns, yes, but we need to provide people and workers basic income if they can’t go to work, assistance to businesses (especially small businesses) to stay afloat and rent/mortgage relief. The government did the bare minimum on this half a year ago and called it a day and that’s a failure on their part.
Well do not take the anger out on me.... Its societies failure not mine. My positions are based on what we have to work with now. I also see a strong correlation with people who support full on lockdowns do not have a job or income to lose.
|
|
|
|
jamestroll
jamespol
Atlas Icon
Posts: 10,532
|
|
« Reply #54 on: November 18, 2020, 12:27:24 PM » |
|
What if it took years to make a vaccine? We are damn lucky that we are within days of Pfizer being ready to seek emergency use authorization. But what if we had a pandemic that took 5 years to make a vaccine? Are we really going to be ing caged animals for 5 years?
If we're playing what ifs, what if the virus had 50% kill rate. Would you support lockdowns multi-month lockdowns then?
The economy is already turning down even without the lockdowns. Maybe force of law shouldn't be applied at this point, but people definitely shouldn't be out and gathering if it's not necessary.
Of course I would! But Covid 19 does not have a 50% kill rate. And we currently do not have a stimulus to support millions of workers. You know what would be worse? Having millions homeless due to forced lockdowns. And I have made it crystal clear I oppose any conventions or large gatherings! And a point was made by another poster earlier: How the hell does closing down non essential shops help? When it will just make everyone go to big box stores. Any store, even big box stores, should remain open with occupancy limits. Edit: If a virus had a 50% fatality rate but was not contagious at all I would of course oppose multi month lockdowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jamestroll
jamespol
Atlas Icon
Posts: 10,532
|
|
« Reply #61 on: November 22, 2020, 10:40:03 PM » |
|
I had a great work out in the gym in the middle of the night last night! And this evening I will order take out from subway. But only to spite the pro-lockdown people!
Maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities in life. For example, doing things for your own sake instead of doing things for the purpose of spiting others. Just a thought. Take it or leave it.
My personal views are that I will not sit down in a dine in restaurant but I see no reason that the option should be entirely excluded for everyone else. I would go as far as to shut down bars. They are problematic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jamestroll
jamespol
Atlas Icon
Posts: 10,532
|
|
« Reply #68 on: December 11, 2020, 08:01:30 PM » |
|
Yeah, complete and utter .... Sure lockdowns add some risks, they also take away others (traffic and workplace accidents). I won't pretend to know which way the balance goes, but to pretend that it significant in either direction is very questionable. In Belgium excess deaths track very strongly with reported Covid deaths. If the effects of lockdowns have a significant influence, we'd expect the excess deaths to fall slower than Covid deaths. (As the lockdown lowers case numbers, Covid deaths go down, but "lockdown" deaths go up). This simply does not happen.
I always love seeing "lack of medical care" in those lists of the risks of lockdowns as well. Medical systems do not delay procedures because there is a lockdown. They delay other medical procedures because they are overburdened by Covid cases. Lockdowns make sure capacity in the medical system remains available for other medical issues.
Of course, I'm not sure why I'm even trying to argue with someone who jumps straight to "conspiracies by the global capitalist elite"
I am not supporting any lockdowns any further after much thinking. 1) We created a massive stimulus bill last March. At that time we had the tools, financial help and resources we needed to have a hard lockdown in the United States. If we would have done a hard lock down at that time we would not have these problems today. Sure by now there would be a "surge" but only like 20 to 30k cases a day. Not 250k cases a day. We could have reopened in July under mitigated measures once the virus spread was nearly eradicated. But we wasted an entire lockdown and wasted literally trillions of dollars. I am not willing to waste more. 2) Any further lockdowns now create an untenable situation. Unlike the spring there is no financial help anymore and this time a hard lock down would actually create the massive fears the anti-lockdown people have. 3) Seeing Republicans openly defy mitigations and mask mandates makes me question the effectiveness of a national lockdown. All it would do is damage blue state economies while doing very little to reduce the virus spread. Given how people are now defying common sense public health standards I have zero sympathy if they get covid 19. Not to mention that even vaccination of only elderly and vulnerable people would make a huge difference in the fatality rate of covid-19 and would go a long way back to normalcy. Also we can debate the pros and cons of the United States lack of a robust welfare system and an economy that is heavily based on a service economy but those two factors have made it nearly impossible to have effective lockdowns in the United States. Along with federalism. Irrespective what you think of levels of welfare spending, consumerism, and federalism it can not denied that they have been major hindrances in controlling the virus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|