Blues COVID email

Woobie06 said:
Big difference between jumping off a building and driving. Data suggests more likely to die from an accident than Corona under 55...
Click to expand...

Serious question. How many more people are you willing to have die from this thing? Not looking for a long, drawn out explanation of "oh everyone's going to get it sooner or later" or "we'll lose more people from mental health issues" or "smoking kills more people than 9/11" or whatever. Just looking for a number. Another 100k? Another 200k? 500k? 1m? Just respond with a number of people you're willing to have die from the virus.
 
notintheface said:
Serious question. How many more people are you willing to have die from this thing? Not looking for a long, drawn out explanation of "oh everyone's going to get it sooner or later" or "we'll lose more people from mental health issues" or "smoking kills more people than 9/11" or whatever. Just looking for a number. Another 100k? Another 200k? 500k? 1m? Just respond with a number of people you're willing to have die from the virus.
Click to expand...

a. You assume we have any control over the numbers. Short of rushing a vaccine and teatments and an Australian style suspension of civil liberties (and one that will continue until such vaccine and treatments can reach at least 80% of the population) there's not much you can do about it. At this point all government efforts short of Australia or communist regime lockdowns or being an island (which isn't possible for us) have failed to contain the thing. So the only thing we can do is try and minimize numbers. And no one is advocating dragging out old people from the nursing homes and throwing keggers for them. Even Sweden had limitations...we just disagree on what's "reasonable".
b. You can't just look at benefit (i.e., lives saved), You also have to weigh the costs. The costs include economics, lives lost due to lockdown, harm on children. We could save lives from car crashes too if we drop the speed limit to 20 miles per hour everywhere and require foam bumpers on cars. So the correct question that you should be asking is if a particular policy can save X lives (knowing that the policy isn't going to get mortality from COVID down to zero) are you willing to do y knowing it will cost z. Math hard.
 
Grace T. said:
So the only thing we can do is try and minimize numbers. And no one is advocating dragging out old people from the nursing homes and throwing keggers for them. Even Sweden had limitations...we just disagree on what's "reasonable".
b. You can't just look at benefit (i.e., lives saved), You also have to weigh the costs.
Click to expand...

Okay, so what's the number of people you're willing to have die from the virus?
 
[
Grace T. said:
a. You assume we have any control over the numbers. Short of rushing a vaccine and teatments and an Australian style suspension of civil liberties (and one that will continue until such vaccine and treatments can reach at least 80% of the population) there's not much you can do about it. At this point all government efforts short of Australia or communist regime lockdowns or being an island (which isn't possible for us) have failed to contain the thing. So the only thing we can do is try and minimize numbers. And no one is advocating dragging out old people from the nursing homes and throwing keggers for them. Even Sweden had limitations...we just disagree on what's "reasonable".
b. You can't just look at benefit (i.e., lives saved), You also have to weigh the costs. The costs include economics, lives lost due to lockdown, harm on children. We could save lives from car crashes too if we drop the speed limit to 20 miles per hour everywhere and require foam bumpers on cars. So the correct question that you should be asking is if a particular policy can save X lives (knowing that the policy isn't going to get mortality from COVID down to zero) are you willing to do y knowing it will cost z. Math hard.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the question he is asking. How many dead people (X) are too many to justify your selfish little soccer trip to Utah (Y1), in person school (Y2) and whatever the f**k else you want (Y3+). You can avoid answering all you want, but your doing so says everything we need to know. There is no amount of dead people that will ever be too many for you.
 
notintheface said:
Okay, so what's the number of people you're willing to have die from the virus?
Click to expand...

Seriously, it's like explaining to my sixth grader why his algebra problem set is wrong even though he thinks he got the right answer.

a. "willing"...you are assuming control we don't have. If you compare results from Peru (harsh lockdowns, mask mandates) and Brazil (President who blew it off and went nearly full Sweden plus higher population density than Peru), Peru did worse on the 3 metrics: cases per thousand, hospitalizations and deaths.
b. The answer isn't x. X doesn't mean anything. X is nonsensical. It only shows, like my 6th grader, you don't understand the problem. A policy is analyzed by x= lives saves where y was the particular policy applied and z is the cost. The question is whether x<z when y is applied.
 
EOTL said:
[


That is exactly the question he is asking. How many dead people (X) are too many to justify your selfish little soccer trip to Utah (Y1), in person school (Y2) and whatever the f**k else you want (Y3+). You can avoid answering all you want, but your doing so says everything we need to know. There is no amount of dead people that will ever be too many for you.
Click to expand...

Lovely to have you back....can't wait til the other 2 get out of prison to join us. You all add so much to the conversation. To answer the question you'd have to outline the exact parameters of the policy in place and define y. Only then can I tell if you I feel x<z.
 
EOTL said:
The next step is to deny they got it at school. And deny they gave it to their parents, friends, grandparents, family with comorbidities, their soccer coach, their teachers, their classmates who then gave it to all of their parents, grandparents, friends and family with comorbidities, their soccer coach, their teachers, etc.

You see, everything is fine as long as you deny why this keeps spreading, the legitimacy of the scientists who are explaining it and the media that reports what the scientists are saying, your role in causing it to spread, even the fact that people are dying from it in the first place. Damn heartburn, the silent killer.

Herman Cain Award recipient of the week (posthumous of course): Tony Tenpenny.
Click to expand...
Herman Cain award. Ha, who is he? He doesn't exist. Tenpenny's wife says on social media he has a big realization to unload, when he's able to breathe without a venilator at 100% (currently at 50%).
 
dad4 said:
3 kids, 3 schools for me.

ES/MS is stable cohort. A cohort is sent home for 2 weeks for each positive test. Other cohorts are not sent home.

HS is planning on normal schedule, 4 days in person, 6 days remote. No clear policy on who stays home when someone tests positive.

JC is totally remote, plus cross fingers and hope for in person classes next term.
Click to expand...
Great feedback.
 
notintheface said:
Okay, so what's the number of people you're willing to have die from the virus?
Click to expand...

I heard 15 a while back, and 12,000 from another participant.

Totally by coincidence, this morning I was sorting out a box of mementos my mother sent me years ago. Included in that was an envelope from a government office with a few leftover sugar rationiing coupons in my name. It hadn't occurred to me that food rationing was still a thing when I was born in 1947, but I had the little government issued documents in my hands to prove it. Why is that relevant? During WW2, everyone participated because everyone recognized the war was a threat to everyone. No one claimed special privileges just because they didn't feel right doing it.

My message to all those resistors out there - Grow up!
 
Grace T. said:
Lovely to have you back....can't wait til the other 2 get out of prison to join us. You all add so much to the conversation. To answer the question you'd have to outline the exact parameters of the policy in place and define y. Only then can I tell if you I feel x<z.
Click to expand...

Outline your parameters as you see fit. You’re the one trying to turn the value of human life into a math equation - which it is not by the way - but let’s see your formula. How many people need to die before you admit that traveling interstate to play a child’s game, in person school and all your other nonsense was the wrong move? Otherwise, your nonsense that it’s a secret formula but you won’t tell us is just a load o’ crap.
 
EOTL said:
Outline your parameters as you see fit. You’re the one trying to turn the value of human life into a math equation - which it is not by the way - but let’s see your formula. How many people need to die before you admit that traveling interstate to play a child’s game, in person school and all your other nonsense was the wrong move? Otherwise, your nonsense that it’s a secret formula but you won’t tell us is just a load o’ crap.
Click to expand...

O.k. Prohibiting my family going to Utah. Kid and I are likely COVID positive. Older was more isolated there than here. Lives saved likely 0. Cost would be having a small kid go cukoo for cocopuffs and run suicidal. Totally worth it plus the added side effect of him having soccer and the older having a pool. On the other side would have to add the older hated it for that very reason of being more isolated which is definitely a reduction in the x as well.
 
notintheface said:
Serious question. How many more people are you willing to have die from this thing? Not looking for a long, drawn out explanation of "oh everyone's going to get it sooner or later" or "we'll lose more people from mental health issues" or "smoking kills more people than 9/11" or whatever. Just looking for a number. Another 100k? Another 200k? 500k? 1m? Just respond with a number of people you're willing to have die from the virus.
Click to expand...

I don’t want anybody to die. If ask you the same question for heart disease, obesity, cancer, etc...how many more people are you willing to let die? Where is the outrage over processed food, fast food, toxic ingredients, etc....smoking causes cancer. They are cancer sticks...why in the world do we sell them? The hypocrisy is endless. We don’t live in a bubble where Corona is the only thing to worry about.

I have no idea how many Rona will get...just like I have no idea how reliable the data reported is. Millions will die over time from the Flu Virus...Cancer, accidents and other causes. None of these things go away, MERS and SARS still exist and are both Corona Viruses. We all assume the risk that these things are out there and people live their lives.

All I’m saying is that if you are 55 and younger, in good health you have a very, very low death rate...and depending on your source, and data set you rely on, for this group the probability of death is in the Flu ballpark.

Nobody is denying Rona is contagious, and deadly for certain demographics. All I’m saying is my demographic is more likely to die by accident than by Corona Virus. Based on Data and Statistics that are publicly available. I’m fine assuming that risk, you may not be. That’s fine, we all have our own risk principles. What I don’t like is having my risk principles determined by people with political agendas.

I mean...c’mon you can peacefully protest, riot, loot, and vandalize property...that’s ok...no risk there...right? Hypocrites for days....

There are better ways to protect those at risk than shutting down the world. This began with faulty data and death models, experts doubled down, data models faulty, more bad data, numbers off, double down again because these experts are “right”, and here we are. It’s like a lie gone out of control...too far down a path to admit you are wrong and pivot.

I’m waiting for my ban, but this is a Covid Email thread so who knows...
 
EOTL said:
Outline your parameters as you see fit. You’re the one trying to turn the value of human life into a math equation - which it is not by the way - but let’s see your formula. How many people need to die before you admit that traveling interstate to play a child’s game, in person school and all your other nonsense was the wrong move? Otherwise, your nonsense that it’s a secret formula but you won’t tell us is just a load o’ crap.
Click to expand...
How is your Ivory Tower these days? Lonely I’m sure, but you’ve got to be used to that by now.
 
Woobie06 said:
There are better ways to protect those at risk than shutting down the world. This began with faulty data and death models, experts doubled down, data models faulty, more bad data, numbers off, double down again because these experts are “right”, and here we are. It’s like a lie gone out of control...too far down a path to admit you are wrong and pivot.
Click to expand...

Could you imagine Fauci, Cuomo, Newsome, and others saying...our bad...we didn’t need to lock down like this, shouldn’t have sent elderly back to homes, etc..burn our economy, spend trillions of $$$ in stimulus, create record unemployment...could you imagine if they said we made a couple mistakes, we were wrong, we should have done things differently, your committed to this decision...no walking it back, not getting that toothpaste back in the tube. Political suicide.
 
EOTL said:
Outline your parameters as you see fit. You’re the one trying to turn the value of human life into a math equation - which it is not by the way - but let’s see your formula. How many people need to die before you admit that traveling interstate to play a child’s game, in person school and all your other nonsense was the wrong move? Otherwise, your nonsense that it’s a secret formula but you won’t tell us is just a load o’ crap.
Click to expand...
EOTL,
I missed you sweetie. Welcome back.
XOXO
 
EOTL said:
The only real way to know exactly how many bones you’ll break jumping off a four story building is to do it. And since the science can’t figure out the exact number with 100% certainty in advance, you should just assume you’ll be fine. So irresponsible of the media to suggest that it’s almost certainly gonna hurt. What do they know?

Of course, even if you don’t survive, @MSK357 will just claim you would have lived but for your heartburn or other “comorbidity” and encourage others to keep jumping.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
Woobie06 said:
Could you imagine Fauci, Cuomo, Newsome, and others saying...our bad...we didn’t need to lock down like this, shouldn’t have sent elderly back to homes, etc..burn our economy, spend trillions of $$$ in stimulus, create record unemployment...could you imagine if they said we made a couple mistakes, we were wrong, we should have done things differently, your committed to this decision...no walking it back, not getting that toothpaste back in the tube. Political suicide.
Click to expand...
How many other things do you deny? The holocaust? Sandy Hook never happened?
 
thelonggame said:
My kids hate online school. I'm sure most kids hate it. If your school opens up with whatever precautions, what is the next step when there are confirmed Covid cases in your kids school or in their class?
Click to expand...
LOL my kids love it! They aren't sure they ever want to go back.
 
thelonggame said:
How many other things do you deny? The holocaust? Sandy Hook never happened?
Click to expand...

Let me be CLEAR...I’m not denying anything, I’m interpreting data, give it a try. I DO NOT believe Sandy Hook was fake, or 9/11, or in other conspiracy theories...except maybe JFK cause it intrigues me.

I don’t believe in the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Sasquatch (although I have seen some hairy dudes in locker rooms in High School and College that made me wonder)...

I do believe in Santa Clause because in our house if you don’t believe you don’t receive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top