COVID-19 Megathread 5: The Trumps catch COVID-19

[SevenEleven]

Can anyone shed some light on to what extent some of these states "reopening" is just a scheme to get out of paying people unemployment?

It feels like that to me, but I don't really know how things like this work in, say, Georgia.

[SevenEleven]

Let's continue to listen to those protesters.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257626866791448576

It's not surprising to see this, but what will most Americans think once we hit 25% or even 30% unemployment, and the economy has completely crashed? When we have breadlines in every city, mass foreclosures across the country, mass bankruptcies, and millions of jobs permanently lost? At some point, people will have to make a choice between their financial well-being and their fears for their health, and that is an impossible choice for many.

It's a sad day when people pick the economy over their health or other peoples health.

But for many people, the economy and their personal health are inseparable. As you very well know, many people only have insurance coverage because of their jobs. And of course, many others have no insurance coverage at all, even with a job. Depriving them of that would put them further into the hole. Do you think it is morally just for someone to be unemployed and to be reduced to begging at a food bank for sustenance, and to hope that they won't be evicted? All for the sake of a months-long lockdown that will not bring a cure to this virus, and by itself will cause more disruption and more harm? I don't think so.

That's a flaw in the healthcare system (a feature, I guess, for right wingers). Has nothing to do with the impact of coronavirus and everything to do with decades of failure of US leadership.

[SevenEleven]

Let's continue to listen to those protesters.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257626866791448576

It's not surprising to see this, but what will most Americans think once we hit 25% or even 30% unemployment, and the economy has completely crashed? When we have breadlines in every city, mass foreclosures across the country, mass bankruptcies, and millions of jobs permanently lost? At some point, people will have to make a choice between their financial well-being and their fears for their health, and that is an impossible choice for many.

It's a sad day when people pick the economy over their health or other peoples health.

But for many people, the economy and their personal health are inseparable. As you very well know, many people only have insurance coverage because of their jobs. And of course, many others have no insurance coverage at all, even with a job. Depriving them of that would put them further into the hole. Do you think it is morally just for someone to be unemployed and to be reduced to begging at a food bank for sustenance, and to hope that they won't be evicted? All for the sake of a months-long lockdown that will not bring a cure to this virus, and by itself will cause more disruption and more harm? I don't think so.

That's a flaw in the healthcare system (a feature, I guess, for right wingers). Has nothing to do with the impact of coronavirus and everything to do with decades of failure of US leadership.

I certainly am not trying to argue that our healthcare system is "perfect" or "flawless"-it is far from that. What I am trying to say is that there is a point where the stay-at-home orders become unsustainable for millions of Americans. And Governors across the country have begun to recognize that.

"Governors", or "a few Republican Governors"?

[SevenEleven]

Let's continue to listen to those protesters.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257626866791448576

It's not surprising to see this, but what will most Americans think once we hit 25% or even 30% unemployment, and the economy has completely crashed? When we have breadlines in every city, mass foreclosures across the country, mass bankruptcies, and millions of jobs permanently lost? At some point, people will have to make a choice between their financial well-being and their fears for their health, and that is an impossible choice for many.

It's a sad day when people pick the economy over their health or other peoples health.

But for many people, the economy and their personal health are inseparable. As you very well know, many people only have insurance coverage because of their jobs. And of course, many others have no insurance coverage at all, even with a job. Depriving them of that would put them further into the hole. Do you think it is morally just for someone to be unemployed and to be reduced to begging at a food bank for sustenance, and to hope that they won't be evicted? All for the sake of a months-long lockdown that will not bring a cure to this virus, and by itself will cause more disruption and more harm? I don't think so.

That's a flaw in the healthcare system (a feature, I guess, for right wingers). Has nothing to do with the impact of coronavirus and everything to do with decades of failure of US leadership.

I certainly am not trying to argue that our healthcare system is "perfect" or "flawless"-it is far from that. What I am trying to say is that there is a point where the stay-at-home orders become unsustainable for millions of Americans. And Governors across the country have begun to recognize that.

"Governors", or "a few Republican Governors"?

Democrat Ralph Northam is letting us reopen restaurants and barbers next week ... announced earlier than Republican Larry Hogan.

That's rather unfortunate to hear; Northam was one of my favorite Governors, too.

[SevenEleven]

Mandatory masks aren't touted by "the left", they're touted by people who take facts into consideration. There's a reason why countries like Taiwan and South Korea have been so much more effective in their response than this country has.

[SevenEleven]

Mandatory masks aren't touted by "the left", they're touted by people who take facts into consideration. There's a reason why countries like Taiwan and South Korea have been so much more effective in their response than this country has.

Perhaps I should have praised it differently. From a political perspective, it has been Democratic officials-predominantly governors and mayors-who have imposed the vast majority of the mandatory mask orders which have been issued within the states. Republican officials have-with the exceptions of Baker and Hogan-largely refrained from doing so. Moreover, polls have shown that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to wear masks or facial coverings in public-I noted an ABC News poll from a few weeks ago to that effect, indicating that 69% of Democrats and 47% of Republicans are wearing them in public. Democrats have also been more likely-as I've also noted-to consider them a necessary measure to combat the pandemic (which I agree with, but not to the extent of mandating it), while Republicans have viewed them as an instrument of control.

Yeah, you can pretty much tell when a Republican walks into a grocery store because everyone else is wearing a mask.

[SevenEleven]

Let's continue to listen to those protesters.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1257626866791448576

It's not surprising to see this, but what will most Americans think once we hit 25% or even 30% unemployment, and the economy has completely crashed? When we have breadlines in every city, mass foreclosures across the country, mass bankruptcies, and millions of jobs permanently lost? At some point, people will have to make a choice between their financial well-being and their fears for their health, and that is an impossible choice for many.

It's a sad day when people pick the economy over their health or other peoples health.

But for many people, the economy and their personal health are inseparable. As you very well know, many people only have insurance coverage because of their jobs. And of course, many others have no insurance coverage at all, even with a job. Depriving them of that would put them further into the hole. Do you think it is morally just for someone to be unemployed and to be reduced to begging at a food bank for sustenance, and to hope that they won't be evicted? All for the sake of a months-long lockdown that will not bring a cure to this virus, and by itself will cause more disruption and more harm? I don't think so.

That's a flaw in the healthcare system (a feature, I guess, for right wingers). Has nothing to do with the impact of coronavirus and everything to do with decades of failure of US leadership.

I certainly am not trying to argue that our healthcare system is "perfect" or "flawless"-it is far from that. What I am trying to say is that there is a point where the stay-at-home orders become unsustainable for millions of Americans. And Governors across the country have begun to recognize that.

I agree, we do need to actually lift the lockdowns soon. There is obviously a point of economic damage which will hurt more people than if the virus infects 70% of the population and hospitals are overloaded. As much as it pains me to say it.
The problem is, we have decided to barely enforce these lockdowns. IMHO, a strictly enforced three week lockdown (with more restrictions) is infinitely better for everyone than months of a pseudo lockdown. The problem is, by trying to appease the loonies of this country, most governors have honestly made things worse. I think states that aren’t seeing dramatic new case reductions (alongside testing increases) should do something like this and then reopen. We can’t afford half-measures, they are making things worse.

Don't blame the governors for the lack of a coordinated, cohesive national response