BearGoggles said:
Unit2Sucks said:
What I would like to understand is what would Republicans consider success? Is ensuring that our healthcare system isn't overwhelmed like NYC and Nola success in and of itself? What if we have to institute new SIP measures in a month or two if our "social distancing" fails? Would that still be success? Does your definition of success involve healthcare outcomes or just economic ones?
Because I wouldn't ask a question like this that I wasn't prepared to answer, I will start by saying we obviously have already failed. We are the laughing stock of the world. We have the "best" healthcare system and the worst outbreak on the planet. The disparity in outcomes appears to correlate highly with wealth which bus another failure.
That said, just because we have failed doesn't mean we should give up. We are still early in what has the potential to be a miserable epoch and can impact the outcome. From here on out, I would define success in terms of how well we contain the virus and are able to protect our most vulnerable populations without whipsawing in and out of SIP orders. There may be a deus ex machina that saves us from even worse outcomes. That could be in the form of therapeutics or a successful vaccine. I had thought we were on our way to testing and contact tracing which would allow us to resume a semblance of daily life without undue risk but it appears our country doesn't have the fortitude for it. I would also consider it a success if our country gravitated toward trust in science and experts and away from magical thinking.
Man, is this post is revealing. You have a really low opinion of our country and it permeates your every thought. Living that way must be miserable.
Both your posts are revealing and yours is just as far gone on the other side if not moreso.
Quote:
By no reasonable metric does the US have the worst outbreak on the planet nor is the US a laughingstock re covid. In fact, the US is admired for both the statistical outcomes and how quickly its private industry has responded with medical and production innovations.
I agree we don't have the worst outbreak and I assume OP was using total deaths/cases for that conclusion and I agree that isn't an appropriate metric.
However, our outcomes are not good and your statement that we are admired is patently ridiculous.
Quote:
Measured by either deaths per 100,000 or mortality rate for observed cases, the US is actually at the very low end - particularly if you exclude China, Iran, Brazil N. Korea and other countries where the numbers are not accurate. The US has the "most" confirmed cases and most "confirmed deaths" simply because we have one of the the largest populations (excluding countries that lie or don't test, like China and India, respectively) and have done more testing (i.e, the gross/actual number of tests) then the other countries.
As I said, I agree that total cases is not a proper metric. Mortality rate for observed cases is a bad metric due to different rates of testing. But where on earth did you get the idea that we are "at the very low end" on deaths per capita? Excluding a handful of microstates that all have fewer than 50 deaths, we are 9th. Certainly not "worst outbreak" as OP said, but not low end either. It isn't good. Most of the countries ahead of us (other than Sweden) have a very high population density to contend with. And pointing out a few countries whose data you don't trust (I agree for good reason) doesn't change that formulation much. There is no way China has more deaths per capita than we do. We have 226 reported per capita (in millions). They have 3. They were barely impacted outside greater Wuhan. They would have had to have hidden 350K deaths to do that. That is not something they can do. If you told me their deaths per million was actually 10, I'd believe it. No, it isn't 226.
On testing you are now cherry picking your methodology. You criticize (justifiably) for using total numbers and then on this one you use total numbers because it suits you. We are not on the higher end on tests per capita. We are about in the middle.
Quote:
And finally, if you take out the poop show that is NY metro areas which account for about 33% of total US deaths, the US numbers are remarkably low compared to other countries.
If you take the poop show that is Wuhan out of China, they have like none. If you take the poop show that is a couple areas of Italy out of the equation, their numbers are remarkably low. If you take the poop show that is major urban centers out of every country their numbers are remarkably low. And if you take out the games that Cal lost last year, we went undefeated. That isn't how this works.
And, while NY metro area and cases are now falling, the rest of the country is going up right now because they started later.
Quote:
The problem is we have leaders (mostly Dems like Newsome and Cuomo (a few weeks back), but also some republicans) who have moved the goalposts. SIP is no longer a temporary measure required to flatten the curve. Now we need to "save every life." Not going to happen. That is a prime example of the magical thinking you abhor. And what you might consider science - the models - actually were magical thinking as well.
See this is really revealing because it is bullshyte. Misrepresent what people said then misrepresent what people are saying and then accuse them of moving the goalposts.
SIP was supposed to flatten the curve AND allow us to put in place procedures that we weren't ready for. The ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS talked about increasing testing capacity. Always.
SIP still is a temporary measure and neither Newsom or Cuomo have said we need to save every life. Both of them are taking measures to open things up. Both have said we need to open the economy. I can't speak to Cuomo, but Newsom set out standards for different phases for opening up before the federal guidelines, and the federal guidelines were remarkably similar. Your characterization of Newsom is a complete fiction. And it is a fiction that is part of some conservatives arguing on this. Set up the strawman that the other side is arguing for semi-permanent SIP when no one is arguing for that. And thus avoid the difficult questions. I have hammered the point of masks, testing, and contact tracing over and over. I get no response from conservatives who are using your line of argument. I suspect because your guy is doing nothing.
As for models being magical thinking, yes, some people love to point to a few people saying we could have a million deaths which was never taken as a realistic number because it was worst case scenario if we did nothing. Most models were not in that frame. Yes, the models change as they get new data and as behavior changes. I'm still waiting for all the conservative tweets that we were lied to when the administration predicted 60,000 deaths by August 1.
The magical thinking we abhor is the lifting of SIP measures while doing little to nothing to curb the spread of the disease. We know how to do it. Other countries have shown the way. However, certain leaders seem to think the economy will magically go back to normal and their primary response on the health side is to hope we get a vaccine someday, otherwise just go about your business while people die around you until we get herd immunity. People are not going back to their normal way of life until they can be safe. At bare minimum the federal government should have invested in N-95 mask production so that, like in Asia, regular people can have enough masks that they can go out in public feeling they have some protection.
The gratifying thing on this subject is that despite manufactured protests, dumbasses protesting wearing masks, and politicians bootlicking on Trump's nonsense, poll after poll shows most Republicans (and the vast majority of the general population) supporting the safety measures that were put in place and also show that a huge majority follow the guidelines and that Republicans actually follow them at the same rate as everyone else.
Quote:
We should acknowledge there will be seasonal spikes - but no more SIP unless there is a real and likely chance that there will be a shortage of hospital beds. And no more SIP unless we have models that are actually correct and don't include worst case projections.
We shouldn't have to shelter in place if we take steps to separate vulnerable populations, wear masks, practice social distancing, continue prohibition on large scale gatherings, test, trace, and separate exposed/infected people. That is how you break the virus' back. I do not agree that hospital beds is the determining factor, but any SIP should be rare and narrowly tailored to stop an outbreak that is getting out of control.
But good luck on the economy. Most people are saying they aren't planning on dramatically changing their behavior due to relaxed standards and something like 80% say they aren't comfortable going to a restaurant.
And I'm going to add that I find the Republican Party's treatment of the American worker on this to be reprehensible. Lift the restrictions so your employer can open up again. Do not require any safety measures. (In the case of meat packing plant actually require they open up again) Cut off unemployment so you have to go back to work. And the kicker, now pushing for giving employers liability relief so if they don't provide a safe workplace you can't sue them. All while doing very little to protect the safety of the general population.
