Jump to content

Moiraine

Donor
  • Content Count

    21,098
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    148

Everything posted by Moiraine

  1. https://www.ketv.com/article/covid-19-inpatients-at-nebraska-medicine-reaches-all-time-high/32662643?fbclid=IwAR1notMnPMaBKmUnpcpiV4-f7DU6A6I8aaU_61O-5LhKdTrD5jHR66sf6b4 So we have more covid cases but they're also allowing more elective surgeries than before. But if we're going to have another wave in June (and that's what I think will happen) we are just getting started. Once hospitals get close to capacity changes will need to happen again.
  2. I think most are considering the rammifications especially since our politicians are waffling about supporting people. But I think it would have been better to stay closed longer than to open when cases aren’t decreasing yet. The 2nd wave is going to be a lot bigger than it needed to be. Even if everything is reopened now it’s not like business is going to be booming, especially as people see case #s spike again.
  3. It’s very frustrating to not have leadership at the federal level. I’m guessing individual states will go into panic mode when we get more outbreaks and go back to stricter guidelines again. No governor is gonna want clips of inundated hospitals shown on the news.
  4. A lot of this is just guessing on my part. But I don't see any reason to believe people are more immune now than they were in February, so I also don't have any reason to believe there won't be more outbreaks. I believe the flattening of the curve is temporary in the U.S. based on how we are responding right now. Some countries might not have more big outbreaks because they have tracking and/or are more strict with their quarantines and are quicker to act. What I'm hoping is that hospitals will be able to increase their capacity to handle this as time goes on so that people can continue to slowly get it over time and the hospitals aren't overwhelmed, and we can take less severe measures to stop it as time goes on. And in the meantime find a vaccine/better treatments. The other problem in the U.S. is the government isn't willing to provide the safety nets that it should, and we also can't just let a bunch of people starve to death, so we have to try to get back to BAU.
  5. We need a good federal, organized response. That hasn't happened and it won't begin to happen until at least January 2021, if ever. Right now we have 50 different plans and if governors don't suck up enough to Trump he threatens to or does withhold help. That Republicans are okay with this and aren't doing anything about it as far as I can tell can be added to the list of disgusting things about them the past 3.5 years. A federal response could be to use tracking to identify pockets of infection and quarantine those areas while other areas try to work close to BAU. The other, worse, option, is to go back to BAU then quarantine then go back to BAU then quarantine and repeat until we have a vaccine or improved treatment/capacity to handle cases. We can't just go back to normal permanently because hospitals will be overwhelmed. Regardless of what the actual plan is (I'm not an epidemiologist), it needs to be coordinated on a federal level, and Trump and his yes men are f#&%ing morons so there's no reason to get our hopes up and consider that a possibility.
  6. I've always found this to be an annoying thing that Christians do. Maybe because my parents were Christians and my dad died young. It wasn't because they didn't pray hard enough, so it's kind of annoying hearing that if you pray God will protect you. That isn't how it works. I think it's better to say/think that if you pray, God won't give you something you can't handle. In the meantime don't be a moron who invites bad things to happen to you.
  7. Just wish it was possible for only these people to get it but unfortunately they’ll pass it on to people who are doing the right thing. I said we’ll have another spike in June but I wasn’t even thinking about Memorial Day.
  8. Kinda crazy when you compare the people who served under Obama to the people who serve(d) under Trump. I'm still wondering why people s#!t on Obama so much. He actually hired quite a few Republicans. He tried to find the best people. His National Intelligence director served under Bush and had a ton of experience before he started in that position. Trump hires a politician/lawyer who lied about his anti terrorism experience. His main "qualification" is that he's a Trump sycophant. This is one thing I really can't understand about any Trump supporters who are at least semi-intelligent. Why are they okay with this kind of thing?
  9. I'm in the Biden might very well have dementia and at the very least his mind is deteriorating as he ages group. That said, dementia is better than having always been a f#&%ing moron and one that is only out for himself even if the rest of the world burns to the ground.
  10. If you're a politician, you have to at least pretend like the voters have some power. You can't say bulls#!t like "look at the alternative" - that takes away voters' power. It's telling them they "have" to vote for you, even if they don't think you'll do s#!t for them. That's exactly what he's doing when he says if you don't vote for him you're not Black. Maybe he should take a page out of Trump's playbook and try to tell the voters everything they want to hear even if he knows he's not really going to do it. It's still true that it would be a disaster if Trump wins over him, but he's bad at this and I still don't understand why Democrats wanted him. I would've put him at 4th or 5th on my list of the major candidates.
  11. So now that we're all WFH out of the sunlight we're gonna die
  12. Which makes my wonder why Warren took such a big hit comparatively about the Native American thing.
  13. A lot of them are acting like he has something on them, and he doesn't need a bunch of GOP senators to act. He just needs them to not do anything while he does what he wants and Barr, etc. do what he wants. They'll twiddle their thumbs and say "let's see what he finds out." If they're scared enough they'll fall in line and if Trump convinces their constituents that the media is lying about the election results, they may just step aside and let things unfold.
  14. This is kind of the problem, IMO. It's at least a small part of why Trump gets away with what he does. People don't have foresight so they can't imagine things getting to that point. So they let him get away with lesser, but still unconstitutional s#!t, just assuming it won't get that far. They also don't think about the precedents he's setting. Let's say he leaves willingly... he's still shown how easily it would be to do for some future president, if no changes to our checks and balances are made. Some things he's doing that are legal, no president had ever done before because they were decent humans. There should be no assumptions made that he will do what's decent, or legal, or good for America.
  15. These are the words of someone who may try to remain in office if he loses the election.
  16. That's likely true. However I think of the important variables right now, fatality rate is the least important among them. I don't think whether it's 0.5% or 4% or somewhere in between is a very important variable right now - we won't really know until months later anyway. The most important imo are the rate of increase in cases, case volume and hospitalization rate, and hospitals' capacity to handle that volume. We can't handle 5% of the population getting hospitalized in a short period of time, even if the death rate is only 0.5% or whatever it is. If hospitals are overwhelmed then fatalities and fatality rate increase (for multiple causes of death).
  17. I have some anecdotal evidence of underestimating the total cases. Someone I work with lives with someone who tested positive for covid. They then tested another family member who doesn't have any symptoms (to see if he can go in to work) and he tested positive. The co-worker then developed symptoms. Since she works from home she doesn't need to get tested in order to work, however she asked if she should get tested and they (whoever administers the test) told her she didn't need to get tested since she has symptoms and lives with other people who tested positive. So while there's probably above a 95% chance she has it, she won't be counted in the numbers unless she ends up getting really sick. This clearly isn't a purposeful way to under report, but it's another example of how underestimating can occur.
  18. I assume the vast majority of doctors are against this, and I realize I just posted a meme mentioning them, but doctors aren't epidemiologists. Those are the people whose advice matters the most right now. But people are stupid so they will listen to the one doctor who will tell them what they want to hear.
  19. Ok. I'll just wait here until she actually uses the law to do something about it.
  20. Yep... sounds like a good idea. Ideally the House since it's more representative of the population.
  21. So, assuming we still have a democracy a year from now and Trump's not the president, how do the Democrats prevent this from happening again? They need to make it so people in these positions can't be fired solely by the executive branch.
×
×
  • Create New...