2019 - nCoV (novel coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China)

[Gator]

It was YOU that was and being ignorant...

Defintion of ignorant - lacking knowledge, information or awareness about a particular thing.


So you accuse me of knowing nothing about the electoral college, its historical roots, its legal authority, and its application.  Yet, you consider yourself all knowing even though you are not a citizen and never lived and worked in the US.   

EDIT:  My final sentence in this post was deleted for using the word "silly," a term considered insulting.  The mods are doing a difficult and thankless  their job of keeping this place orderly, or otherwise our decorum could decline to something akin to those TV shows where each side attempts to silence the other by screaming.   Hopefully none of us want that. 

Suffice it to say that Moby deserves placement on on my persona non grata list....that will preempt many insults. 

   

[Gator]

Consider it the same as a handicap when playing golf. 

No!  Another non-resident speaks. 

A handicap system allows golfers of varying skill levels to compete on a fair and level playing field.  A handicap system is more akin to affirmative action initiatives. 

In contrast,  the Electoral College is a key part of our brilliant Constitution to assure an elected President has wide support from across the nation, not just the high population areas. It is consistent with other parts of our Constitution to limit executive power, a  paramount concern considering our founding fathers gained our independence fighting the king of the world's most powerful nation. 
 

This is one instance where the Trumpisim "It is what it is" rings true.

What!!!!

It is pragmatic above all else.  It necessitates that Presidents campaign to everyone.  Otherwise a Presidential  nominee would not even campaign in low population states. 

That is not to say the system is perfect, mainly in the way electoral districts are drawn. 

There is no drawing of districts to select electors.  The number of electors awarded to each state is equal to one for each senator and one for each member in the US House of Rep.  The drawing of Congressional Districts certainly influences the election of members of the House House representative, yet has nothing to do with the selection of electors with the exception of Maine.   

The most important factor in any election is voter apathy.  I imagine compulsory voting could result in vastly different outcomes and its effect would be far greater than any faults one might think exists within the current EC system.

Not everyone is fully aware of  how their choices will affect their lives, so why force them to vote  for something they don't understand.  I rarely vote for school board members, water district commissioners, etc. 

Your push for mandatory voting needs to be expanded to include an independent computer analysis of the life situation, goals and values of  each person.  The computer could match each voter to the candidate deemed best for them.  Just think of all the money spent on campaign ads that could be put to worthy programs such as education and healthcare. 

[Gator]

Right now I think a hybrid strategy would work best. Think Sweden but with the care homes, the old, the weak and the ill shielded. Introduce social distancing, hand washing, mask wearing and limit numbers indoors. That would of course mean big changes and a new norm but we would have saved more of the vulnerable whilst avoiding the destruction of our economy.

Hind sight is a wonderful thing.

Rosco, you and I are thinking alike. 

[Gator]

The number of deaths per million is, until then, the best measuring stick we have.

BC, you are not a simpleton, so why make it so simplistic when society is complex.  If only about deaths, all nations failed.  In a weight management program should participants with a BMI of 25 feel smug because one person has a BMI of 35?     

A more scholarly approach will consider impacts on the economy, social well being, education, etc. 

Looking at these two countries, more is simlar than differs as far as populations, urban/rural spread etc goes.   

   

You like to compare US with Italy, saying the US is slightly younger., as if it is apples and apples.  Lifetstyle and diet certainly differ. Obesity has been identified as a prime preexisting condition resulting in more grave outcomes for those infected with COVID.   The US rate of obesity is  36.2%, Italy's 19.9%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_obesity_rate

Not apples and apples. 

In the end, due to these differing methods, the US will fare much worse in terms of deaths and length of time the population and economy is affected. 

Did the producers die, or were the deaths confined mostly in the elderly or sickly?  I don't know. 

Based on projections, I estimate approximately a bare minimum of 60,000 lives in the US could have been saved had the same mitigation methods used in Italy been used in the US, along with more quickly bringing infections down to a level where tracking and tracing are much more effective less negative effects on the population and economy.  Considering the timing of the spread in the US it could be far more than 60 thousand lives saved, even half the running total.

Let's see the math.  No, just your basic assumptions. 

But Gator and others are likely correct in stating such would not work in the US because we are too 'rowdy', 'unruly' or whatever and not because the US is somehow inherently 'different' than Italy which you seem to point at.

Indeed, individualism is important to many Americans. 

[BC]

No!  Another non-resident speaks. 

A handicap system allows golfers of varying skill levels to compete on a fair and level playing field.  A handicap system is more akin to affirmative action initiatives. 

In contrast,  the Electoral College is a key part of our brilliant Constitution to assure an elected President has wide support from across the nation, not just the high population areas.

IOW a system that scores or weighs votes from some states differently than others.  A handicap, advantage, weight, whatever.

What!!!!

Nothing wrong with 'It is what it is' or?

There is no drawing of districts to select electors.  The number of electors awarded to each state is equal to one for each senator and one for each member in the US House of Rep.  The drawing of Congressional Districts certainly influences the election of members of the House House representative, yet has nothing to do with the selection of electors with the exception of Maine.   

Sure.  It's one of the quirks of our election system, but indeed not pertinent to the EC.

Your push for mandatory voting needs to be expanded to include an independent computer analysis of the life situation, goals and values of  each person. 

I wasn't pushing for mandatory voting, just using it as an example how voter apathy (or whatever one wants to call it) makes more of a difference than any perceived failures of our election system.

[BC]

BC, you are not a simpleton, so why make it so simplistic when society is complex. 

Because it's the only objective measuring stick we have at this time.

A more scholarly approach will consider impacts on the economy, social well being, education, etc. 

Sure, when folks get their heads around all the variables to figure it all out.  Maybe replace 'more scholarly' with 'very complex'.
   

You like to compare US with Italy, saying the US is slightly younger., as if it is apples and apples.  Lifetstyle and diet certainly differ. Obesity has been identified as a prime preexisting condition resulting in more grave outcomes for those infected with COVID.   The US rate of obesity is  36.2%, Italy's 19.9%.

Bottom line, a person that does not get infected cannot die from the virus despite having conditions that raise risks of doing so.  That is why mitigation of transmission is so important in reducing the number of deaths no matter what underlying differences may exist.

Not apples and apples.

Dead is dead or?

Did the producers die, or were the deaths confined mostly in the elderly or sickly?  I don't know. 

Are they not both consumers?  Do they not keep the buck moving along?  Do people who are elderly or sickly or have high-risk conditions stop paying their rent, mortgages, stop working?  Do the services and products they generate not contribute approximately 20% of our GDP or create 14% of jobs in the US?

Let's see the math.  No, just your basic assumptions.

When you show yours, I'll show mine

Indeed, individualism is important to many Americans.

Which is quite ok if it does not affect the individualism of others, such as infecting others with the virus by your actions or inaction.  Double edged sword.

[msmob]

Rosco, you and I are thinking alike.

Gator,

Thank you..

This made my day))

[Rosco]

So Moby if I'm wrong, the UK is wrong, Sweden is wrong.....how would you handle the pandemic so that nobody would die and the economy and jobs were safe?

[Rosco]

Rosco,

Sometime in the future, statisticians, mathematicians and scientists will sit down and figure it all out, but we are talking years, when COVID is pretty much over.

I agree which is why I choose to debate people who insist that Sweden got it wrong. Moby uses words like "abysmal" and "horrendous" but when you break it all down, thats just a headline. For example 8% of nothing is still nothing. He also claims stuff like Brexit is a disaster and a failure yet the answer will only be available years down the road.

We'll know more in time and I agree its far too early to make bold statements but not everyone is capable of being rational. All we can do is look at things in a balanced way and be objective rather than emotional.

The number of deaths per million is, until then, the best measuring stick we have.

But its a measuring stick for deaths alone without providing any context. If someone wanted to live somewhere warm and used a chart showing the hottest day, it wouldn't guarantee them the warmest average climate year round.

I think that this is a misleading measuring stick, open to abuse by those who chose to use it for their own agenda.

My points regarding locked down Belgium performing worse than open Sweden for example, makes it impossible to argue that Sweden got it wrong. They might have but there's so many factors suggesting they didn't.

[BC]

Rosco,

Whether it's the virus or your toilet, best results so far were achieved by to flushing it out.

Quick implementation of a 45-day strict national lockdown, 45 days reopening gradually, by the numbers followed by prudent measures such as masks and distancing with consumers and workers being able to 'do their thing' with lower risk.  Quickest, and safest way that helps prevent relapses and allows for good tracking and tracing of any new infections.

As far as the economy goes, don't put the cart in front of the horse.  Look for steady, uninterrupted recovery instead of faltering with mitigation rollbacks and high infection levels that only makes businesses and customers wary and lose confidence.

[Rosco]

Rosco,

Whether it's the virus or your toilet, best results so far were achieved by to flushing it out.

Quick implementation of a 45-day strict national lockdown, 45 days reopening gradually, by the numbers followed by prudent measures such as masks and distancing with consumers and workers being able to 'do their thing' with lower risk.  Quickest, and safest way that helps prevent relapses and allows for good tracking and tracing of any new infections.

As far as the economy goes, don't put the cart in front of the horse.  Look for steady, uninterrupted recovery instead of faltering with mitigation rollbacks and high infection levels that only makes businesses and customers wary and lose confidence.

I agree that an initial strict lockdown for say 21 days would be prudent, given we're told to isolate for 14 if we've been exposed. And I mean a proper lockdown. That would bleed out the virus almost everywhere. Followed by opening up cautiously and shielding the vulnerable. In the UK we locked down from March to June with the initial idea that we were protecting the NHS. In the end, none of the wards got anywhere near maximum occupancy and all the extra billions we spent on the emergency hospitals, didn't even get used.

I'm not saying it was the wrong thing to do but it didn't hit us as hard as we feared. If we hadn't locked down maybe we would but thats why a hybrid system would work better than sitting at home for 5 months doing nothing.

Some folks think the economy comes last but never ever take it for granted. A broken economy will kill more people than a virus.

Also we called it a lockdown in the UK but in reality people were taking money off the government and spending time in the sunshine with their friends and family. Not everyone of course but when I was out walking the dog, I noticed it was often busier than when people were at work. We were never locked down.

[msmob]

So Moby if I'm wrong, the UK is wrong, Sweden is wrong.....how would you handle the pandemic so that nobody would die and the economy and jobs were safe?

Simples:

I'm correcting your Q to," how WOULD I have handled.. "

1/ Have a track  'n'  trace program in place that works ( esp. at international hubs )

HOW many times has 'our' govt told us they have a plan for same ....then NOTHING?

2/ I'd have locked down earlier and made the fines higher.. Cyprus fines started from 300 Euros and one hads 2 hours to leave home and get back when shopping

[BC]

All we can do is look at things in a balanced way and be objective rather than emotional.

Add apolitical as well.

But its a measuring stick for deaths alone without providing any context.

It includes all contexts.

I think that this is a misleading measuring stick, open to abuse by those who chose to use it for their own agenda.

That will happen using any yardstick.

My points regarding locked down Belgium performing worse than open Sweden for example, makes it impossible to argue that Sweden got it wrong. They might have but there's so many factors suggesting they didn't.

One clue is population density and country size (distance between cities)  Belgium is a very densely and urban-centric with only very short distances between cities, much like northern Italy and NY.  Higher population density, logically thinking, would allow the virus to transmit more quickly and distances between cities would affect how fast it spreads onward.  This is just one of many many factors, but an important one I think.

The image below shows two of the hardest hit areas in western Europe.  Belgium and parts of Germany that had high infection rates in the north and Milan/Venice/Bologna areas in the south.  Both are sprawling, industrialized, very densely populated areas.

[msmob]

In the UK we locked down from March to June with the initial idea that we were protecting the NHS. In the end, none of the wards got anywhere near maximum occupancy

We have had this discussion elsewhere - you were wrong and are still wrong

[Faux Pas]

   
Bottom line, a person that does not get infected cannot die from the virus despite having conditions that raise risks of doing so.  That is why mitigation of transmission is so important in reducing the number of deaths no matter what underlying differences may exist.

BC, no government, government instituted lock down, no mask or social distance can protect anyone from a virus. Plainly the virus doesn't recognize the governments. Mandated rules to follow isn't going to save anyone's life. They do however rob us of our liberties and basic freedoms. In time most everyone will have contracted this virus and lived through it or died.

If you recall as I, the initial lock down was only to flatten the curve and slow the spread (not stop it) allow hospitals and medical systems to not be overwhelmed and to treat the infected. Just look at the conversations now. Reducing deaths is a noble goal but, stopping life to do so have never proven to work. Covid in these last 6 months has turned into a political tool. It's not about life and death anymore. It's about control

[BC]

BC, no government, government instituted lock down, no mask or social distance can protect anyone from a virus. Plainly the virus doesn't recognize the governments. Mandated rules to follow isn't going to save anyone's life. They do however rob us of our liberties and basic freedoms. In time most everyone will have contracted this virus and lived through it or died.

FP,

Then what do you attribute the obvious difference in the following graphs to?

Does the virus simply no longer like Italy?  Did it just 'magically' go away? Of course not. So what went on here that even today causes Italy to have 1/30th of deaths (population adjusted) than the USA?

[GQBlues]

...Does the virus simply no longer like Italy?  Did it just 'magically' go away? Of course not. So what's went on here that even today causes Italy to have 1/30th of deaths (population adjusted) than the USA?

LMAO! Cut through the chase, BC. Make living your life a little easier. Just say it straight out. It’s because the US have Trump as president whereas Italy do not. Maybe something more relevant like, the US having ‘payday loans’ or the US runs midnight infomercial, etc whereas Italy do not.

There, now we can resume actual conversation about the virus. Like for example comparing the virus virulence in Montana vs the European Union. You can even be the designated ‘graph’ overlord.

[Rosco]

Simples:

I'm correcting your Q to," how WOULD I have handled.. "

1/ Have a track  'n'  trace program in place that works ( esp. at international hubs )

HOW many times has 'our' govt told us they have a plan for same ....then NOTHING?

2/ I'd have locked down earlier and made the fines higher.. Cyprus fines started from 300 Euros and one hads 2 hours to leave home and get back when shopping

If I'd written "How would I have handled...." it would have been a question to myself. What I wrote didn't need correction. Please refrain from changing stuff that doesn't need changed. Every single thing involving you is laborious.

Back to the chat.

1) OK so you'd magically invent, manufacture and implement a track & trace system that hadn't been developed and wasn't readily available. We're off on the wrong foot again Moby and you're starting to imagine stuff to suit. I blame our government now for being 6 months down the road and not exactly setting the heather alight.

2) You'd have locked down earlier when nobody was locking down and all the experts hadn't found sufficient evidence to do so. European countries locked down within days of each other and the turning point in each country was the date of the 3rd confirmed covid death. It's easy to replay history and look like the smart guy but sadly you're not even the smartest guy in this conversation.

I agree we should have locked down properly because we didn't have a lock down, we had a please stay indoors and behave but your answer doesn't answer my question. It's like asking someone what they would have done to win the battle of Culloden in 1745 and saying - I'd have used apache gunships.

 
 

[Rosco]

Add apolitical as well.

It includes all contexts.

That will happen using any yardstick.

One clue is population density and country size (distance between cities)  Belgium is a very densely and urban-centric with only very short distances between cities, much like northern Italy and NY.  Higher population density, logically thinking, would allow the virus to transmit more quickly and distances between cities would affect how fast it spreads onward.  This is just one of many many factors, but an important one I think.

The image below shows two of the hardest hit areas in western Europe.  Belgium and parts of Germany that had high infection rates in the north and Milan/Venice/Bologna areas in the south.  Both are sprawling, industrialized, very densely populated areas.

Respectfully we'll have to agree to disagree in some areas.

What I will add is that population density is only one parameter from many. Culture, age and obesity are key deciding factors too. On this point alone, skinny young clean folks who respect personal boundaries and crammed into a densely populated environment will fair better than older unwell fat folks with more space. That's why I'm insisting that deaths per million is only a vague stat to highlight.

Anyway, opinions are like arseholes as they say.....

[Rosco]

BC, no government, government instituted lock down, no mask or social distance can protect anyone from a virus. Plainly the virus doesn't recognize the governments. Mandated rules to follow isn't going to save anyone's life. They do however rob us of our liberties and basic freedoms. In time most everyone will have contracted this virus and lived through it or died.

If you recall as I, the initial lock down was only to flatten the curve and slow the spread (not stop it) allow hospitals and medical systems to not be overwhelmed and to treat the infected. Just look at the conversations now. Reducing deaths is a noble goal but, stopping life to do so have never proven to work. Covid in these last 6 months has turned into a political tool. It's not about life and death anymore. It's about control

I pretty much agree with all of this. 

[BC]

GQ,

Ridicule and denigrate as much as floats your boat.  Will not change the facts.

Yesterday, EU 183 vs US 1290 deaths.

[edit] Don't forget that's with 116 million more people in EU.  You can do the math.

[BC]

Respectfully we'll have to agree to disagree in some areas.

Indeed, and that is quite ok.

[Rosco]

Indeed, and that is quite ok.

 

[Faux Pas]

FP,

Then what do you attribute the obvious difference in the following graphs to?

Does the virus simply no longer like Italy?  Did it just 'magically' go away? Of course not. So what went on here that even today causes Italy to have 1/30th of deaths (population adjusted) than the USA?

I get it, you like graphs. Graphs are but a snapshot in time and do not tell the story. Comparing Italy to the USA is like apple to pears. I've no idea what or how Italy counts deaths. I do know that in the US the covid death numbers are highly skewed. Dying with covid is counted the same as dying by covid. Most of the US deaths are the elderly and that was multiplied by numerous governors pushing infections into nursing homes. Was that the case in Italy or anywhere else you wish to do a graph comparison? If you like graph comparisons have you graphed covid to other viruses? There are simply too many variables to consider when comparing Italy to the US.

Back to the covid virus. No, it doesn't like or dislike one country or government from another. In fact viruses do not like or dislike anything. They merely spread and infect until the host immunity has adjusted for it. Slowing that infection does not change where or when that will be. I suspect before it is over we'll all have had it and lived or died. Just like every other that mankind has dealt with through the ages. Eventually it comes down to herd immunity one way or the other. Slow or fast, lock downs and masks may or may not actually slowdown the spread. We really do not know. What we do know is the world is approaching this virus different than any previous viruses. Rather than studying graphs perhaps you should ask why to that very basic question?

[GQBlues]

GQ,

Ridicule and denigrate as much as floats your boat.  Will not change the facts.

Yesterday, EU 183 vs US 1290 deaths.

[edit] Don't forget that's with 116 million more people in EU.  You can do the math.

Which just proved even further making this pandemic as some sort of ‘competition’ is about as pointless and redundant as a door knob. Like I have already said before, there’s one significant legacy in this pandemic that unfortunately Italy will have to live with in infamy.

But that’s really your problem, so knock yourself out.