Pretty much sez it all. Ain't fun, but necessary.Big C said:Go!Bears said:Tongue in cheek, I know, but we didn't and that is the problem. Some places did, some didn't and because our states can't close their borders to each other (as EU states did) it was essentially the same as not doing it. If the entire country had shut down for two months at the same time, we could be where the EU is.Big C said:Go!Bears said:The EU is a good referent. Essentially a very weak federal system - similar to the way this played out in the US given the absence of national leadership. The difference is cultural. We have a toxic political culture and an underlying problematic social culture (extraordinary individualism). The combination has been disastrous. Our population size was not the problem. It's us.burritos said:
That has a population of over 300 million people?
"Hey, we TRIED that social distancing stuff for over TWO MONTHS! If that's not enough, then screw it."
Tongue in cheek, indeed. WAY too many people in this country never quite figured that there is a difference between "cautiously reopening with social distance" and "cool, it's over, we can party again". Others only had the self-discipline to social distance for a few months.
Three test positive?
11,120 Views |
88 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by Blueblood
Meanwhile among the general student population:
Quote:
We have seen the number of University Health Services positive cases increase from a running total of 23 since the start of the pandemic, to 47 new cases in just one week. The majority of these new cases stem from a series of recent parties connected to the CalGreek system, which included students both within the CalGreek community and others, and led to some secondary spread within households and within other smaller gatherings. Generally, these infections are directly related to social events where students have not followed basic safety measures such as physical distancing, wearing face coverings, limiting event size, and gathering outside.
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
But the problem is that the consequences don't end with the risk taker. The risk taker gets the virus, remains asymptomatic, continues to take similar risks, and ends up infecting others who haven't taken the same risks.
This was always a recipe for disaster: flattening the curve required trusting our fellow citizens to do the right thing. Clearly that is too much to ask of those that need haircuts and want to party.
AunBear89 said:BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
But the problem is that the consequences don't end with the risk taker. The risk taker gets the virus, remains asymptomatic, continues to take similar risks, and ends up infecting others who haven't taken the same risks.
This was always a recipe for disaster: flattening the curve required trusting our fellow citizens to do the right thing. Clearly that is too much to ask of those that need haircuts and want to party.
"Outstanding post when one was really warranted!"
Any time you taking a serious risk that may affect others, you include those individuals in the serious risk you have chosen to take.BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
Now if you want to stay at home and drink yourself into a state of alcohol poisoning, have at it. But if you chose to run across a street against a red light where there is traffic, that is another story. You not only endanger your life but the life of the person who will hit you.
You wearing a mask does little for you but it creates a safer environment for everyone with whom you come in contact. At some point, Americans need to wake up and understand their personal liberty extends only as far as their front door. Beyond that point, they are interacting with the community at large and that requires behavior that does not put others at risk.
Congrats-you qualify to be Governor of Florida.BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
Masks were extremely prevalent during the protests compared to the Trump rallies, so you are making a political point (I guess) but not a scientific one.
Here in the NJ/Philly area, we have less people with opinion like yours, and people are not driven by political statements; you go to Walmart, and people with NRA stickers on their truck are getting out wearing masks, just like those with Biden2020 stickers.. They understand that your risk is not yours alone, and in the NJ county where I am spending a lot of my summer months, the infection rate from last week to this week is down to 2% increase.
As JFK said, "We will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship....as long as it doesn't mean we can't go to Applebee's for a few months. If that's the case, all bets are off."Big C said:Go!Bears said:The EU is a good referent. Essentially a very weak federal system - similar to the way this played out in the US given the absence of national leadership. The difference is cultural. We have a toxic political culture and an underlying problematic social culture (extraordinary individualism). The combination has been disastrous. Our population size was not the problem. It's us.burritos said:
That has a population of over 300 million people?
"Hey, we TRIED that social distancing stuff for over TWO MONTHS! If that's not enough, then screw it."
We aren't avoiding this disaster. It either unfolds slowly or quickly. The point of the shut down is to prevent hospital overrun.AunBear89 said:BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
But the problem is that the consequences don't end with the risk taker. The risk taker gets the virus, remains asymptomatic, continues to take similar risks, and ends up infecting others who haven't taken the same risks.
This was always a recipe for disaster: flattening the curve required trusting our fellow citizens to do the right thing. Clearly that is too much to ask of those that need haircuts and want to party.
So, do anti-maskers feel the same way about the prohibition of public defecation - that it's an infringement on their rights/freedom? Laws against public defecation don't exist to protect the defecator, they exist to protect the overall health of the public. The same is true of mask-wearing - which is a response to a specific pandemic, not a perpetual requirement. Why is this so hard to understand?
HearstMining said:
So, do anti-maskers feel the same way about the prohibition of public defecation - that it's an infringement on their rights/freedom? Laws against public defecation don't exist to protect the defecator, they exist to protect the overall health of the public. The same is true of mask-wearing - which is a response to a specific pandemic, not a perpetual requirement. Why is this so hard to understand?
Good point. I would think that most (every?) law is to protect you from me and vice versa. And in doing so a bit of personal freedom is removed. I'm amazed at friends and family who don't get this. Maybe I'm misremembering my philosophy of law lessons from 40 years ago.
HearstMining said:
So, do anti-maskers feel the same way about the prohibition of public defecation - that it's an infringement on their rights/freedom? Laws against public defecation don't exist to protect the defecator, they exist to protect the overall health of the public. The same is true of mask-wearing - which is a response to a specific pandemic, not a perpetual requirement. Why is this so hard to understand?
Nice. Reminds me of a line from an old song by The Vandals, a punk band:
"America stands for freedom, but if you think you're free try walking into a deli and urinating on the cheese."
mbBear said:Congrats-you qualify to be Governor of Florida.BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
Masks were extremely prevalent during the protests compared to the Trump rallies, so you are making a political point (I guess) but not a scientific one.
Here in the NJ/Philly area, we have less people with opinion like yours, and people are not driven by political statements; you go to Walmart, and people with NRA stickers on their truck are getting out wearing masks, just like those with Biden2020 stickers.. They understand that your risk is not yours alone, and in the NJ county where I am spending a lot of my summer months, the infection rate from last week to this week is down to 2% increase.
I must have missed where BP mentioned anything about masks.
It did *not have to be this way*. We didn't necessarily have to live in an environment where a public health decision is politicized. It's as if we have a president who says "Only communists wash their hands after going to the bathroom!" and 40% of the country believes him and does likewise. It's nuts.
Four turnings generation theory: Seems like we are in the unraveling phase(if not entering the crisis cycle). The prophets and nomads can't get their **** together and we're basically waiting for the hero generation(Millennials) to clean this all up when it hits the fan.JSC 76 said:
It did *not have to be this way*. We didn't necessarily have to live in an environment where a public health decision is politicized. It's as if we have a president who says "Only communists wash their hands after going to the bathroom!" and 40% of the country believes him and does likewise. It's nuts.
"Choosing the risk level you are comfortable with:" That doesn't include those not comfortable with masks?Civil Bear said:mbBear said:Congrats-you qualify to be Governor of Florida.BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
Masks were extremely prevalent during the protests compared to the Trump rallies, so you are making a political point (I guess) but not a scientific one.
Here in the NJ/Philly area, we have less people with opinion like yours, and people are not driven by political statements; you go to Walmart, and people with NRA stickers on their truck are getting out wearing masks, just like those with Biden2020 stickers.. They understand that your risk is not yours alone, and in the NJ county where I am spending a lot of my summer months, the infection rate from last week to this week is down to 2% increase.
I must have missed where BP mentioned anything about masks.
Perhaps, but PB seemed to be referring to people choosing to attend protests and rallies, not whether they were choosing to wear masks. That said, by choosing to attend those events you need to consider that others in attendance won't be wearing masks.mbBear said:"Choosing the risk level you are comfortable with:" That doesn't include those not comfortable with masks?Civil Bear said:mbBear said:Congrats-you qualify to be Governor of Florida.BearPatrol said:
At some point you have to let people choose the risk level they are willing to live with... people risked it to protest and they risked it to go to Trump rallies... both sides of the spectrum... I'm ok with people making their choices and dealing with their consequences.
Masks were extremely prevalent during the protests compared to the Trump rallies, so you are making a political point (I guess) but not a scientific one.
Here in the NJ/Philly area, we have less people with opinion like yours, and people are not driven by political statements; you go to Walmart, and people with NRA stickers on their truck are getting out wearing masks, just like those with Biden2020 stickers.. They understand that your risk is not yours alone, and in the NJ county where I am spending a lot of my summer months, the infection rate from last week to this week is down to 2% increase.
I must have missed where BP mentioned anything about masks.
thanks Bobo..
eight hits from 125 athletes, and so soon, is nowhere near a passing grade # bad covid, baad
eight hits from 125 athletes, and so soon, is nowhere near a passing grade # bad covid, baad
muting ~250 handles, turnaround is fair play
You do realize it is important to see if the 5 new cases infected other players meaning its a waiting game for probably another two weeks. More importantly, were all 5 in the same sport, i.e., football players, or other sports? I hope not. If the total stays around less than or at10 in say a week and a half, then Cal may have it under control. But, if the number increases to13 or so then watch out. I suspect then the total to go over 20 by early August. Fingers crossed!Bobodeluxe said:
And then there were eight
"We have it totally under control. ... It's going to be just fine."
Featured Stories
See All
No. 3 Bears Advance To NCAA Championship Finals
by Cal Athletics
Cal Football Spring Practice Day 13 (Free)
by Jim McGill
Ott and Endries Step Up For Cal Football's Reading Challenge
by Bradley Connelly
Cal Football Spring Practice Day 12
by Jim McGill