What we are afterwards is what concerns me.

#67 | POSTED BY YAV

Old people die. That is the natural order of things. As a collective we can accept them dying a little earlier.

What is harder to accept is when children and young people die. Be thankful that this virus does not seem to adversely affect children. They are in a lot more danger right now of dying from the flu than from the coronavirus.

If we had young children dying at the same rate as the elderly (which is usually what happens), I would be a lot more concerned for our collective mental health.

I hope we learn from this. Learn to prepare. To not put conservatives in positions of power. But as a society and a country I think we will come out of this ok. Damaged but not broken.

Though I generally agree with you and find you very much on target, your value determination of who's "productive" and their impact to us "getting through this" should be reconsidered.

We're at 1.6% death rate today.

#42 | POSTED BY YAV

To start I said 1% of the population, not 1% of those infected. Hopefully we will have a little less than 80% of the population actually infected (that is approximately the percentage necessary for herd immunity), and the 20% that aren't infected will be mostly the ones at higher risk.

But even at 3% of our entire population dying, I think our country and society can survive.

"In Italy, 85.6 percent of those who have died were over 70, according to the National Institute of Health's (ISS) latest report."

I would say the following posts come across as gleeful in a political sort of way:
#3 #5 #9 #16 #18 #20 #22

#61 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Show me the post where someone says they are happy that the numbers are so high.

Just because YOU would be gleeful in a reverse situation does not mean that WE are gleeful.

That is called "projection".

Not all of us.

#40 | POSTED BY ZED

We will probably lose around 1 percent of the population. And, the least productive 1 percent (older and sicker). So yes, a lot of people will die, and because of conservatives a lot of people will die needlessly, but as a country and a society we will survive this. It is going to get BAD over the next couple of months, but we will get through the other side of it.

We still have no clue how many people actually have it.

The response to this threat by the conservative administration has been absolutely incompetent. The "confirmed cases" numbers are almost useless.

The only reliable numbers are the number of deaths (I am assuming, though, that we are now testing pretty much any death for coronavirus... otherwise the numbers are still low). Now, in the US, we are up to ~1700 deaths. From that number we can project back the number of infections. We need two assumptions. The average mortality rate, and the average time from infection to death. I would say the time from infection to death is probably 4-5 weeks, but I will be conservative with 3-4. And, I think a good guess at the average mortality rate is ~1% (especially near the beginning, younger people are more likely to get it and spread it).

Based upon those assumptions, we would have had ~170 THOUSAND Americans infected THREE TO FOUR weeks ago. How many MORE people do you think have been infected in the meantime? Especially since it was only around that time that Trump actually admitted that the virus might be kinda bad and that the fire predictions might NOT be just a big liberal hoax.

Feel free to argue my assumptions, and plug your own in to make your own projection. Even the most sycophantic aren't going to be able to argue the numbers aren't scary.

We are screwed. But we will get through it.

Aren't these those Death Panels the GOP were warning us about?? Who knew that it was all just projection.

#74 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

Conservatives are all projection. Complaints about how inefficient government is? Look at how "efficiently" they manage (or, really, don't) government when they are in charge. Complaints about nepotism and corruption? They elected the embodiment of it to lead their party and be our President. Complaints about election fraud? The only people I ever hear about being charged with election fraud for doing it intentionally are conservatives (others who get charged are usually due to them not knowing they aren't allowed to vote), and they had to REDO an election in North Carolina due to blatant election fraud on the part of conservatives.

Seriously. If you want to know what immoral/unethical/illegal things conservatives are doing, just look at what they claim liberals are doing. Because they just accuse liberals of doing what conservatives would do in the same situation. And while morals would prevent liberals from doing most of the things conservatives accuse them of, conservatives themselves don't have the same limitations.

- an unwinnable attempt to save the old and the sickly
I see that someone has already thrown his hands skyward in terror and trembling and is now offering his grandparents... and a few of his siblings and their children (see: 3 year old dies in LA of cvirus) to appease his desire not to have to miss a paycheck or an NBA basketball game.
Oh, the horror.

#60 | POSTED BY CORKY

It is called "learned helplessness". Conservatives are indoctrinated with it from a young age. As soon as there are hard decisions to me made, or ANY potential discomfort or sacrifice on their part, they throw up their hands and say "its impossible", that it is too big for humans to control so we might as well just let it play out.

As a similar example, see their reaction to Global Warming.

Of course, the fact is that Trump removed a health expert in Bejing that was supposed to monitor and warn about just that kind of potential outbreak few months before it happened, apparently to save costs, despite already running more than $1T in deficits in what he called "the best economy ever":
www.vox.com - A US epidemiologist was embedded with the Chinese CDC. The Trump administration discontinued the position.

#7 | POSTED BY CUTIEPIE

To be fair, that probably doesn't matter much. While earlier notice might have helped other countries, it probably would not have helped us. Even once we did learn about it, the government did all it could to ignore, downplay, and deflect from it. And NOT making any real attempts to contain or prepare for it. Learning about it earlier would just have meant more time of conservatives ignoring, downplaying, and deflecting.

Plus those damn LIB states were the first ones to shut everything down.

#40 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

And they are the ones who drive the economy. If lib states are shut down, who is going to pay for all the "free stuff" for the conservative base? And now conservatives want to give "free stuff" to everyone. Conservatives need those liberal economies back up and running to pay for it.

It's interesting how quickly Republicans have pivoted from "it's completely under control" to "you don't *really* need parents, do you?"

#9 | POSTED BY JOE

Not sure whether to give you a NW, a FF, or just wish there was a "depressing because it is true" flag.

you have to be reminded this one is not about Trump.

#6 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

None of it is truly about Trump. Trump is just a crazy narcissistic -----. But, there are lots of crappy people like him in our country.

What it is truly about is that conservatives decided to elevate said crappy person to the highest position in our government. And, here is another example of a crappy person that conservatives have elevated to a position of power.

He didn't get into this position on his own. Other people decided to help him and support him and vote for him.

YOU ALL built that. This isn't about Trump. It is about what should be concluded from the fact that the people conservatives CHOOSE to represent them are in general crappy human beings.

They always run on conspiracy theories.

Stock up on tin foil now. There is no doubt that the gullible mouth breathing conservative base will be hoarding it by the time of the election. Probably piling it up next to their 50 costco packs of TP.

So... it sounds like AT LEAST half the GOP Senators have been exposed to someone (Rand Paul) with a confirmed case of coronavirus. Wouldn't the responsible thing for them to do be self quarantining?

But McConnell refuses to allow remote votes.

Though we only need 4 GOP Senators to show up to maintain quorum.

Sounds like Dems should be able to get things DONE!

I have read several spring break stories with many of the spring breakers quoted. Not a one said the felt it was safe because of what the president said as you say.
Can you cite your source, please?

#15 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

So, you are admitting that they feel that it is safe. And that the President and other conservatives have said that it is safe (no worse than the flu).

But you want PROOF that those are related? Why does it matter? What is the point of you being so obscenely pedantic (other than the obvious, that you are deflecting and holding water for your lord and savior Donald Trump)?

YOU say that them feeling things are safe is "selfish". So do you also believe that Donald Trump TELLING people that they are safe was "selfish"?

I don't know why you think I should condemn some random kids for acting poorly, when the top levels of conservatives in our government have been acting even worse. Look at Rand Paul. He probably infected half of the Senate. Wasn't THAT selfish??? Conservatives in government have consistently downplayed and spread FUD about this crisis, and they are (or are supposed to be) RESPONSIBLE TO ME. My tax dollars pay their salaries. And they are supposed to be ROLE MODELS for the kids you are complaining about. Those kids owe me nothing, have NO responsibility to me. Yet here you are, focusing on some kids instead of the adults who are supposed to be setting the examples.

THAT is what you and the other conservatives built. You are just a typical boomer, a little snowflake whining about how outraged you are that millennials are following YOUR example in how to be selfish.

What happened to all those supposed "libertarians"? When did all the conservatives decide to become socialists, focused on "the greater good" and giving away "free stuff"? They were always preaching about how YOUR RIGHTS should not be restricted because of SOMEONE ELSE'S problem. But now that YOU have the problem (higher risk of dying from the virus) YOU want to restrict THEIR rights to protect yourself. They are just following YOUR ideology. Deal with it. Stop your whining. It is annoying.

That's exactly what I pointed out in a thread I started on the spring breakers. Selfish bastards.

#11 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Lol.

Selfish? They were just listening to our wise and benevolent president who said that it was no worse than the flu. That it is overblown and a liberal hoax.

And to Conservative Congressional Representative Nunes, who said that if you don't feel sick then you SHOULD go out to restaurants and spend money.

Looks like Gullible Goat is falling for the liberal deep state lies. SAD!

Just remember, other people didn't build that, Obama didn't build that. YOU built that.

Lol... Saudia Arabia "won control" seems to imply this is good for them. It is not.

OPEC was SA's baby. The end of OPEC is a big blow to them.

They may claim they are doing this to bankrupt other producers, but that won't do anything. Yeah... some investors will lose money when they go bankrupt. But the wells will still be there (idle). Someone will own them. And, if the price of oil gets high enough to make them profitable again, those well will start pumping again.

SA is just trying to maximize their profit. The more oil they pump, the more cash they get. Even if they are getting less per barrel overall. This drop in prices has them terrified that they will run out of money.

It is a move of desperation.

Couldn't have happened to better people.

Republicans... YOU built that.

#19 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Why do people apologize (or demand an apology)? To make themselves feel better? Well, maybe some people. But for a person that is not an emotional snowflake, it is to provide some assurance that the person giving the apology does not make the same mistake in the future.

The same goes for assigning blame. I am guessing that you quoted from a thread about China. How does "assigning blame" to China help us right now? We are in a crisis. Please explain how you think assigning blame to China will help us have a better outcome in this current crisis (COVID-19). Or is it just emotional snowflakes trying to make themselves feel better (looking at you Jeff).

Because conservatives, through the person that they chose to represent their party and ideology as President, are CONTINUING to screw up. Every day they screw up more and more. So, by assigning blame to conservatives and Trump we hope to either change their behavior (though at this point it is unlikely that either Trump or his sycophants will change) or marginalize them so actual intelligent people will be given the opportunity to make decisions, and thereby increase the odds of having a better outcome of this crisis by having MORE competent leadership and LESS screw-ups.

#18 | POSTED BY MSGT

I don't think anyone actually wants to "nationalize" production at this point. Though, if you want, you can trace confusion for that term to Trump who said we SHOULDN'T "nationalize" in response to people suggesting he use the Defense Production Act to ensure increased supply of vital medical supplies (even though the DPA does not actually "nationalize" production).

#1 | POSTED BY SENTINEL

Hey Rcade... can we get a "pedantic" flag?

I say NO money to businesses. Give money to people. Businesses will die, but that is ok. That is the risk you take when starting a business. But if the people get through this fine, they will have money to spend, and businesses will be there to take that money (either businesses that survived or new ones will be created). And those businesses will hire people to produce the products (or services) to get the money provided by the demand. DEMAND is what drives the economy. Protect the people and the demand, and through the demand the economy, is protected.

If you don't believe travel restrictions will help stop the virus.
Why would you believe "social distancing" would stop the virus?

#1 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Nothing is going to stop the virus. It is almost twice as contagious as the flu (R0 value). We can only hope to slow it down to try not to overwhelm our healthcare system.

And our confirmed cases are 2-3 weeks behind what is actually the case (incubation period + time to show symptoms + time to get tested). 2-3 weeks ago Trump was still telling his whole high risk (old and unhealthy) base that this was a hoax. We are F'd.

As I have said before, the human cost will be tragic. I do not celebrate the deaths that will occur. But the silver lining is the political darwinism. The fact that it will hit conservatives harder (and kill more of them) because they were stupid enough to believe Trump when he said that it was "no worse that the flu" and a "liberal hoax" is in a way good because maybe it will make us better prepared next time (because there are less idiots electing idiots).

It is rich now hearing all the conservatives whine and complain about the millennials going to bars or going to the beach and how "selfish" they are, when it is the same conservatives who have been downplaying the virus from the beginning for political reasons (because they are all Trump sycophants).

It snuck up in the sense that China knew what they were dealing with, hid it from the public and enabled it to travel the globe.
You want to rip the Trump admin for a subpar or bad response, fine. But don't carry water for the Chi-comms. Their culpability for this global pandemic vastly and exponentially eclipses how other governments have responded and that includes Trump.

#12 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Why do I give a crap about the Chinese response? Or any other government response?

Are you actually saying you EXPECTED China to be completely transparent and forthright in this situation? If not, do you think that you are a genius among conservatives and all the rest of them (especially the ones you decided to put in charge of the government) are too dumb to realize that China might NOT be transparent?

The important question is how do we prevent this from happening in the future. That is why "blame" is important. How do you PROPOSE to change China's behavior, Jeff? Because last I checked they were a sovereign country. And they are pretty much going to do what they want regardless of what YOU want them to do.

Though, there are things we can control. Knowing how we expect China to react in a similar situation we can put mechanisms in place to counter it or at least lower the risk. One thing you could do is have a portion of government keeping an eye out for these threats. Lets give it a random name like... Pandemic Response Team. Then, even if China DOES NOT do everything perfectly how Jeff wants them to, you have people watching out for that and preparing to respond properly in the US.

Refusing to just whine about something that we have no control over (another country's response) is not "holding water" for them. It is acknowledging our limitations. We vote for OUR government, not theirs. We expect OUR GOVERNMENT to respond to the best of its ability. And YOU are "holding his water" by saying that its not all poor Trump's fault that he had a terrible response, because the Chinese did what we would have expected them to do anyways.

This is why we need to get conservatives out of government. They absolutely refuse to take responsibility for their shortcomings, hence why they are always screwing things up and repeating their mistakes. You cannot learn from a mistake unless you are willing to actually ACKNOWLEDGE it was a mistake (as opposed to just blaming it on the Chinese).

I was looking at the daily report for GA of confirmed coronavirus cases, and noticed that only 2% of the confirmed cases were for kids (under 18).

Almost a quarter of our population is under 18. And this is the demographic were a significant portion don't understand what the word "hygiene" means. So, I would expect that actual cases (as opposed to confirmed ones) would be HIGHER for this demographic than the general population.

The fact that they aren't (and are in fact significantly lower) implies to me that we are not anywhere CLOSE to tracking actual cases. It is spreading through the communities pretty much unimpeded. We are just finding out about cases that actual show adverse health outcomes after the fact.

This is going to hit, and it is going to hit hard. Because the testing (as we are doing it) is really pointless. It would only be useful if we were actually finding a large percentage of ACTUAL cases, so we could ensure those people, and the people around them, are taking extra precautions to limit the spread of the virus. As it is, testing serves no real purpose, because for every person we "confirm" and quarantine, there are probably 10 out there that are unconfirmed, spreading the virus.

"Nobody knew healthcare viruses could be so complicated."