That is a weak argument...Let me ask a better question what should California do?71Bear said:Because Germany is executing a strategy that focuses on a long term solution and was put in place early on. Conversely, the US has no plan other than "what should we try today?" Unfortunately, California is part of the US. Had this state been an independent country, I have no doubt that we would be on the same track as Germany.Goobear said:I could argue the Democrats want to keep it closed for the same political reasons. And there it is. Take the damn politics out of it. Neither party does have the best interests of the country as their main goal. In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Cal Football Unlikely
29,353 Views |
317 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by philbert
Is there a specific metric that you are looking for in order to make the case that we should be more open than Germany at this stage in our respective outbreaks?Goobear said:Shouldn't we use percentages?...I do agree with smart openings. In Holland for example elementary schools opened in May, High-schools will open in June. Basically they are stratifying risk groups and phase in those whith less risk sooner than those who have higher risk groups. Sounds logical to me. Bottom line is it is not 0 risk ((Santa Clara Mrs. Cody)) but smart risk taking.Unit2Sucks said:Goobear said:In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Germany's daily new cases is down 90% from their peak while California still has a growing number of daily cases in its biggest population center.
Would you consider that to be relevant to a decision?
I should note that Trump recently said "Nothing's worse than declaring victory before that victory has been won." One of the few times he actually said the right thing - why can't that be the thing Republicans decide to get on board with?
The growing number of cases in population centers if there is more than greater tolerable infection, absolutely take it into account. You in fact stratify. Just like I think we should do.
I also want economic risks looked at at the same time, not just healt in a vacuum. If we did health only there would be no phones, no cars etc etc. So obviously we do not do that single level thinking.
Maximize both economic outcome and Covid outcome to a situation where the lines of both intercede....
Germany is roughly 2x our population (83M vs 40M). California has roughly 3-4x as many daily new cases so roughly ~6-8x per capita, and that delta is still growing. The death numbers are less steady, but California has had roughly 2x as many over the past week - so roughly 4x as many per capita, and again that delta is growing.
There is only one number that Germany is doing worse than us on and that's total dead per capita (they are at 8k and we are at 3.2k) but there is no doubt we will surpass them, and that's regardless of whether we continue to SIP or not. SIP hasn't been as effective in California as it has around the world. There are any number of reasons why that might be the case, but it's hard to ignore.
When I look at the data, what jumps out at me is not that we are in a better position to open than Germany, it's why isn't what we are doing working? NB - the y axes don't have the same scale so make sure to note that while comparing charts.
Germany:
California:
Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
I suspect the SEC manual will be one line: "call heads or tails."71Bear said:MLB published a 67 page document detailing health and safety protocols that would be necessary in order to resume play. Given the differences between baseball and football, how many pages would be required to resume football? 100s?ColoradoBear said:Goobear said:As I said take politics out of it.....GivemTheAxe said:Goobear said:I could argue the Democrats want to keep it closed for the same political reasons. And there it is. Take the damn politics out of it. Neither party does have the best interests of the country as their main goal. In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Give us a break with the argument that both parties are equally at fault.
Newsom (like any rational leader) is under pressure to open the government while trying to do so under circumstances that will minimize the number of deaths. It is not an easy choice.
The choice is easy if you care only about your re-election and not about the people.
The Prez thought his entire life has been interested in only one thing HIMSELF.
Even though I consider myself a Democrat, I have long admired many many Republicans even when I disagreed with their political positions.
Most recently John McCain.
But to say that both parties are equally at fault and are equally disregarding the health safety and financial well being of the people of the United States is entirely unjustified
There's really no way to detach politics from how the US Federal govt is responding to CV19, or how different states are now differing in response. And those differing responses will absolutely affect how sports in general and CFB specially will be played in the fall and beyond.
The relevant party in Santa Clara County is the public health officer whose name is Sara Cody. She ordered the shutdown and is the one who despite all the positive data seems to want to continue it. As a resident of the county, I am very frustrated by her actions.wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
Sluggo
That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
In my opinion, here is what the US, including California, should (and can) do...Goobear said:That is a weak argument...Let me ask a better question what should California do?71Bear said:Because Germany is executing a strategy that focuses on a long term solution and was put in place early on. Conversely, the US has no plan other than "what should we try today?" Unfortunately, California is part of the US. Had this state been an independent country, I have no doubt that we would be on the same track as Germany.Goobear said:I could argue the Democrats want to keep it closed for the same political reasons. And there it is. Take the damn politics out of it. Neither party does have the best interests of the country as their main goal. In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/we-could-stop-the-pandemic-by-july-4-if-the-government-took-these-steps/2020/05/15/9e527370-954f-11ea-9f5e-56d8239bf9ad_story.html
Note: I included this earlier in a separate post...
Fair enough...wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
What is Google? I am not familiar with that term....
Based on what I saw MLB proposed for safety to the players, I see no realistic way football can be played this Fall. Sit in the stands, shower at home or hotel, no player interaction at all really. This is a professional league with minimal contact and a 25 man roster. How in the world do you train, practice and prepare for a football season given that is how MLB hopes to allow games to begin.
Football by its very nature is not a social distancing sort of sport. To practice and play you must engage in contact and involves many more support staffers. The more I read the less likely it seems to me we will see games in the Fall. I have actually nearly given up on the notion the team will play. Now I just hope I can once again sit at the bar during Happy Hour and enjoy a single draft beer, sometime before 2022.
Football by its very nature is not a social distancing sort of sport. To practice and play you must engage in contact and involves many more support staffers. The more I read the less likely it seems to me we will see games in the Fall. I have actually nearly given up on the notion the team will play. Now I just hope I can once again sit at the bar during Happy Hour and enjoy a single draft beer, sometime before 2022.
I think you should stratify the data, pull LA out and what do you get?Unit2Sucks said:Is there a specific metric that you are looking for in order to make the case that we should be more open than Germany at this stage in our respective outbreaks?Goobear said:Shouldn't we use percentages?...I do agree with smart openings. In Holland for example elementary schools opened in May, High-schools will open in June. Basically they are stratifying risk groups and phase in those whith less risk sooner than those who have higher risk groups. Sounds logical to me. Bottom line is it is not 0 risk ((Santa Clara Mrs. Cody)) but smart risk taking.Unit2Sucks said:Goobear said:In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Germany's daily new cases is down 90% from their peak while California still has a growing number of daily cases in its biggest population center.
Would you consider that to be relevant to a decision?
I should note that Trump recently said "Nothing's worse than declaring victory before that victory has been won." One of the few times he actually said the right thing - why can't that be the thing Republicans decide to get on board with?
The growing number of cases in population centers if there is more than greater tolerable infection, absolutely take it into account. You in fact stratify. Just like I think we should do.
I also want economic risks looked at at the same time, not just healt in a vacuum. If we did health only there would be no phones, no cars etc etc. So obviously we do not do that single level thinking.
Maximize both economic outcome and Covid outcome to a situation where the lines of both intercede....
Germany is roughly 2x our population (83M vs 40M). California has roughly 3-4x as many daily new cases so roughly ~6-8x per capita, and that delta is still growing. The death numbers are less steady, but California has had roughly 2x as many over the past week - so roughly 4x as many per capita, and again that delta is growing.
There is only one number that Germany is doing worse than us on and that's total dead per capita (they are at 8k and we are at 3.2k) but there is no doubt we will surpass them, and that's regardless of whether we continue to SIP or not. SIP hasn't been as effective in California as it has around the world. There are any number of reasons why that might be the case, but it's hard to ignore.
When I look at the data, what jumps out at me is not that we are in a better position to open than Germany, it's why isn't what we are doing working? NB - the y axes don't have the same scale so make sure to note that while comparing charts.
Germany:
California:
There is a guy on the pressers covered by NPR who made the statement in question named Dr. Hon. Believe his title is something like Director of Infectious Disease and Response. And yes, he did say they won't open if it meant one death on his watch.sluggo said:The relevant party in Santa Clara County is the public health officer whose name is Sara Cody. She ordered the shutdown and is the one who despite all the positive data seems to want to continue it. As a resident of the county, I am very frustrated by her actions.wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
Sluggo
Some strange things about LA, as KNC radio picks-up the LA County Health Director's mid-day presser when I am usually driving:Goobear said:I think you should stratify the data, pull LA out and what do you get?Unit2Sucks said:Is there a specific metric that you are looking for in order to make the case that we should be more open than Germany at this stage in our respective outbreaks?Goobear said:Shouldn't we use percentages?...I do agree with smart openings. In Holland for example elementary schools opened in May, High-schools will open in June. Basically they are stratifying risk groups and phase in those whith less risk sooner than those who have higher risk groups. Sounds logical to me. Bottom line is it is not 0 risk ((Santa Clara Mrs. Cody)) but smart risk taking.Unit2Sucks said:Goobear said:In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Germany's daily new cases is down 90% from their peak while California still has a growing number of daily cases in its biggest population center.
Would you consider that to be relevant to a decision?
I should note that Trump recently said "Nothing's worse than declaring victory before that victory has been won." One of the few times he actually said the right thing - why can't that be the thing Republicans decide to get on board with?
The growing number of cases in population centers if there is more than greater tolerable infection, absolutely take it into account. You in fact stratify. Just like I think we should do.
I also want economic risks looked at at the same time, not just healt in a vacuum. If we did health only there would be no phones, no cars etc etc. So obviously we do not do that single level thinking.
Maximize both economic outcome and Covid outcome to a situation where the lines of both intercede....
Germany is roughly 2x our population (83M vs 40M). California has roughly 3-4x as many daily new cases so roughly ~6-8x per capita, and that delta is still growing. The death numbers are less steady, but California has had roughly 2x as many over the past week - so roughly 4x as many per capita, and again that delta is growing.
There is only one number that Germany is doing worse than us on and that's total dead per capita (they are at 8k and we are at 3.2k) but there is no doubt we will surpass them, and that's regardless of whether we continue to SIP or not. SIP hasn't been as effective in California as it has around the world. There are any number of reasons why that might be the case, but it's hard to ignore.
When I look at the data, what jumps out at me is not that we are in a better position to open than Germany, it's why isn't what we are doing working? NB - the y axes don't have the same scale so make sure to note that while comparing charts.
Germany:
California:
LA and Orange Counties just went back and did a deep dive into what is called "institutional clusters." Basically they did full (100%) testing of licensed nursery facilities, jails, etc. and the last few days about 90% of the new cases in LA are from "institutional settings." She also said that the increase in deaths was attributed to the deep dive. Further, she said the lack of good information is why she wants to keep the restrictions in place through July (which was a total FU to UCLA and USC). I'm assuming from a strictly medical standpoint, this is the safe, rational response. The response of the County was to say her order now only applies to unincorporated areas, and cities can have their own reopening subject to the Governor's oversight. This is a total FU to the Health Director. So UCLA and USC will open up based on what the City of Los Angeles does.
I don't know the OC results.
A new verb, such as Google it. Today's trivia, the Google name came from misspelling the word "googol" on his PHD thesis. I will take "nerds are not funny" for $800, Alex."71Bear said:Fair enough...wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
What is Google? I am not familiar with that term....
BTW, I don't take issue that someone else issued the orders.sluggo said:The relevant party in Santa Clara County is the public health officer whose name is Sara Cody. She ordered the shutdown and is the one who despite all the positive data seems to want to continue it. As a resident of the county, I am very frustrated by her actions.wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
Sluggo
See,that is the point. Aren't there some smart Berkeley statisticians that can A. Stratify this stuff, B. Create statistically sound reasoning to open up the economy without bias based on this stratification?wifeisafurd said:Some strange things about LA, as KNC radio picks-up the LA County Health Director's mid-day presser when I am usually driving:Goobear said:I think you should stratify the data, pull LA out and what do you get?Unit2Sucks said:Is there a specific metric that you are looking for in order to make the case that we should be more open than Germany at this stage in our respective outbreaks?Goobear said:Shouldn't we use percentages?...I do agree with smart openings. In Holland for example elementary schools opened in May, High-schools will open in June. Basically they are stratifying risk groups and phase in those whith less risk sooner than those who have higher risk groups. Sounds logical to me. Bottom line is it is not 0 risk ((Santa Clara Mrs. Cody)) but smart risk taking.Unit2Sucks said:Goobear said:In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Germany's daily new cases is down 90% from their peak while California still has a growing number of daily cases in its biggest population center.
Would you consider that to be relevant to a decision?
I should note that Trump recently said "Nothing's worse than declaring victory before that victory has been won." One of the few times he actually said the right thing - why can't that be the thing Republicans decide to get on board with?
The growing number of cases in population centers if there is more than greater tolerable infection, absolutely take it into account. You in fact stratify. Just like I think we should do.
I also want economic risks looked at at the same time, not just healt in a vacuum. If we did health only there would be no phones, no cars etc etc. So obviously we do not do that single level thinking.
Maximize both economic outcome and Covid outcome to a situation where the lines of both intercede....
Germany is roughly 2x our population (83M vs 40M). California has roughly 3-4x as many daily new cases so roughly ~6-8x per capita, and that delta is still growing. The death numbers are less steady, but California has had roughly 2x as many over the past week - so roughly 4x as many per capita, and again that delta is growing.
There is only one number that Germany is doing worse than us on and that's total dead per capita (they are at 8k and we are at 3.2k) but there is no doubt we will surpass them, and that's regardless of whether we continue to SIP or not. SIP hasn't been as effective in California as it has around the world. There are any number of reasons why that might be the case, but it's hard to ignore.
When I look at the data, what jumps out at me is not that we are in a better position to open than Germany, it's why isn't what we are doing working? NB - the y axes don't have the same scale so make sure to note that while comparing charts.
Germany:
California:
LA and Orange Counties just went back and did a deep dive into what is called "institutional clusters." Basically they did full (100%) testing of licensed nursery facilities, jails, etc. and the last few days about 90% of the new cases in LA are from "institutional settings." She also said that the increase in deaths was attributed to the deep dive. Further, she said the lack of good information is why she wants to keep the restrictions in place through July (which was a total FU to UCLA and USC). I'm assuming from a strictly medical standpoint, this is the safe, rational response. The response of the County was to say her order now only applies to unincorporated areas, and cities can have their own reopening subject to the Governor's oversight. This is a total FU to the Health Director. So UCLA and USC will open up based on what the City of Los Angeles does.
I don't know the OC results.
Yeah, I knew that one... googol - 1.0 x 10 (to the one hundredth power). The keyboard on an iPad won't allow the standard usage of the "to the x power"......wifeisafurd said:A new verb, such as Google it. Today's trivia, the Google name came from misspelling the word "googol" on his PHD thesis. I will take "nerds are not funny" for $800, Alex."71Bear said:Fair enough...wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
What is Google? I am not familiar with that term....
Wife, that sounds about right for Santa Clara County. The county has lost its mind. But I do think it will open despite Dr. Hon, though much slower than it should. Right now my kids schools are talking about only twice a week in person. Absurd. I wish it was easier to move.wifeisafurd said:There is a guy on the pressers covered by NPR who made the statement in question named Dr. Hon. Believe his title is something like Director of Infectious Disease and Response. And yes, he did say they won't open if it meant one death on his watch.sluggo said:The relevant party in Santa Clara County is the public health officer whose name is Sara Cody. She ordered the shutdown and is the one who despite all the positive data seems to want to continue it. As a resident of the county, I am very frustrated by her actions.wifeisafurd said:Just for the record, the person in charge of Infectious Disease and Response and in particular COVID for Santa Clara identifies as a man. Nice google search in any event.71Bear said:Just for the record, the person in charge of public health in Santa Clara Co. is a woman.wifeisafurd said:I respectfully disagree. I don't think anyone is proposing that players be subjected to unwarranted COVID risk or risk of spreading COVID. I would add there always is some risk in areas that provide entertainment or business in general, it just is how much you are willing to accept. You go on the playing field or perform, you assume risks, especially in contact sports. We, as fans or spectators, demand athletes, NASCAR drivers, Cirque du Soleil performers, etc. assume those risks for our entertainment or otherwise.Unit2Sucks said:wifeisafurd said:Players all want to play, as do coaches. Making it their decision is not the way to go. The more experienced adults in the room have to make a decision that it is reasonably safe. And it is broader then even that. There has to be a decision on the campus side as well. No school means no football..Unit2Sucks said:
I'm hearing lots of arguments that remind me of ancient Roman gladiator fans.
It's not up to us to decide what risks other people should take for our entertainment. Just like I should be able to decide what risks I take in my life, these students and employees should have agency.
This just isn't our decision.
Assuming fans are allowed, it is your decision if you want to take the risk to attend games. Like I said in another post, with some states dropping all restrictions, we will have a better idea what are the risks by June when decisions about school and football are scheduled to be made by Cal and many Pac schools. Stay safe my friend.
Yes, to be clear, a lot of people have to give the go ahead before players can run through the tunnel. My point is that we as fans should not be demanding anyone risk their health for our entertainment.
My first day in law school, we went over a case in which future Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes overruled a lower decision holding a railroad negligent in the death of a patron, providing railroads immunity because innovative industry deserved a subsidy for economic enterprise (railroads then were instrumental to the country's development). I assume this case was to first reality check to the idealism of the first year students coming in to change the world.
We ask people in our society to take on risk in order that society may advance. We don't shut down during bad flu seasons, even though we know medical wards will be full of children and 60,000 or so Americans will die from the flu in a bad year per the CDC. (I think the US has around 80K COVID deaths so far).
The Holmes case has long been overruled as railroads diminished in value, but the concept still survives. Just look at cases on internet immunity. Judges, economists, accountants, politicians, and many other professions are used to cost benefit analysis. One profession that doesn't always seem that way is medical regulators. When I hear the Infectious Disease dude from Santa Clara County say he will not open up any business until he is assured there will not be one COVID death under his watch, I really have to wonder. He certainly will never be able to say that about seasonal flu or just even someone getting a pneumonia from a bad bug where thousands will die under his watch every year. We as a society assume risks in order to function. Yet I see essentially the same statement as the Santa Clara guy on this board from seemingly sophisticated people. The best argument is not a person or even some people may die from COVID if you are too aggressive. In order to allow a free and open society we subject people to risk and death all the time. It is that you will set the stage for a second wave and too many will die to offset the other impacts on closing society and business down. And we have several states testing that premise right now by dropping SIP restrictions, and I guess (hope?) we will find out by June the results. But in the meantime, petty dictators like the guy in Santa Clara don't help the cause for those of us expecting rational leadership.
Sluggo
Sluggo
Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
I said not word one about the need for legitimate votes supporting whatever issue I support. Just that every vote cast be legitimate. But you wished to first put that in my agenda (certainly not my words, but yours) and then went off on some rant about Trump, hypocrisy, cover up, deaths in states not reported.GivemTheAxe said:OdontoBear66 said:With an admitted strong bias toward fiscal conservatism and moderation in most else, I cannot abide by using the control of voting to be used to keep "legitimate" voters from voting. My worry is that those who are not legitimate voters (or the ballots thereof) get counted as well. I hope you can understand that someone can believe that all those who are eligible should be able to vote should they choose, but at the same time want to may sure that there is a legitimacy to "every" vote. So on the one side I sit with the Dems on this, but then on the other with the Repubs. And that GiveemtheAxe is why I abhor political parties and their control of the process. Throw in a Moderate political party and most of this anger would subside as common sense floats to the top.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
You cite an old canard often use by people who want to suppress the vote that if you don't impose restrictions then there will be non-legitimate votes.
The only "legitimate" votes are those that support their candidates
(By the way the OLD Republican Party stood for fiscal conservatism. The NEW Republican Part supports fiscal conservatism only when the Democrats are in control.)
The hypocrisy of the Prez's position has been shown by many many action. Including the fact that his administration set scientific standards for Re-opening the country. Then he ignored Those standards when it became clear that (because of the failures by his administration) the country could not meet those standards.
Now his administration puts out the story that the standards have been revised; but no one is allowed to see the scientific backup for those new standards.
Worse yet now more and more states (All Republican controlled) are refusing to provide access to the information about the number of deaths.
That's like playing football and having the refs not make any announcements explaining who committed the foul or what the foul was.
"15 yard penalty against Cal. Someone on the Cal team did something wrong and we think it deserves a 15 yard penalty."
Sheesh get over your anger with Trump. Get all legitimate votes and drive him out of office. Seems pretty simple to me. And you wish to define old and new Repubs for me. What does that have to do with anything. Give me a moderate political party and those in it can argue how fiscally conservative they do or don't want to be, but do not assume that because I want ONLY legitimate votes that I have any love for Trump. I suspect that there are tons of voters who have no great love at all for Trump that will feel forced to vote Repub because the alternative is so abhorrent but then that is a whole other topic.
I dont know anyone who will vote for Trump. I would vote for Bob Bockrath if he was the opponent.
Bring back It’s It’s to Haas Pavillion!
Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
Vote by mail and absentee ballots cast by mail have been done for a long time with very few issues. Hell, Trump himself voted by mail (and may have broken the law in doing so) just recently! There are obviously incorrect ways to implement this, and CT's doesn't really sound the most well-thought-out, but let's stop pretending voting by mail is opening up the floodgates to massive voter fraud. This has been a red herring dogwhistle non-issue for the right for as long as I've been paying attention. I won't even get into voter suppression. Are you a resident of CT?Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
That aside, I wish we had done this differently. We're clearly starting to open up everything again. Once we start, there will basically be zero appetite for anything approaching SIP if there is indeed a second wave this fall/winter. It looks like we should have the hospital capacity to deal with that when it comes but let's not pretend everyone infected and ill enough to be hospitalized has walked out so I don't know how much that really matters in terms of the death toll if we don't have anything more effective for treatment than ventilator assisted breathing and thoughts-and-prayers. For a country with our resources, we are going to have more deaths from this than we should have had. I hope all of your friends and family pull through this okay. I've got parents who are in their 70s and I'm... terrified.
Just responding to claims that the Repubs have no beef on voter fraud.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
Less wind and more evidence, please.Rushinbear said:Just responding to claims that the Repubs have no beef on voter fraud.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
If fraud was not an issue, why did the Obama admin frustrate True The Vote by holding up their 501c3 application in the IRS? If what you say is true, why did they spend so much political capital on it and on defending themselves when they did it? Why is it reported in so many places that there are more registrations than there are voting age citizens? This will not go away.62bear said:Vote by mail and absentee ballots cast by mail have been done for a long time with very few issues. Hell, Trump himself voted by mail (and may have broken the law in doing so) just recently! There are obviously incorrect ways to implement this, and CT's doesn't really sound the most well-thought-out, but let's stop pretending voting by mail is opening up the floodgates to massive voter fraud. This has been a red herring dogwhistle non-issue for the right for as long as I've been paying attention. I won't even get into voter suppression. Are you a resident of CT?Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
That aside, I wish we had done this differently. We're clearly starting to open up everything again. Once we start, there will basically be zero appetite for anything approaching SIP if there is indeed a second wave this fall/winter. It looks like we should have the hospital capacity to deal with that when it comes but let's not pretend everyone infected and ill enough to be hospitalized has walked out so I don't know how much that really matters in terms of the death toll if we don't have anything more effective for treatment than ventilator assisted breathing and thoughts-and-prayers. For a country with our resources, we are going to have more deaths from this than we should have had. I hope all of your friends and family pull through this okay. I've got parents who are in their 70s and I'm... terrified.
Are you kidding about true the vote? This is a group that wants to force people to show government issued ID to vote but happens to be based in a state that makes it very difficult for poor people to get government issued ID. That's voter suppression in the name of clutching their pearls and making sure there's no "voter fraud."Rushinbear said:If fraud was not an issue, why did the Obama admin frustrate True The Vote by holding up their 501c3 application in the IRS? If what you say is true, why did they spend so much political capital on it and on defending themselves when they did it? Why is it reported in so many places that there are more registrations than there are voting age citizens? This will not go away.62bear said:Vote by mail and absentee ballots cast by mail have been done for a long time with very few issues. Hell, Trump himself voted by mail (and may have broken the law in doing so) just recently! There are obviously incorrect ways to implement this, and CT's doesn't really sound the most well-thought-out, but let's stop pretending voting by mail is opening up the floodgates to massive voter fraud. This has been a red herring dogwhistle non-issue for the right for as long as I've been paying attention. I won't even get into voter suppression. Are you a resident of CT?Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
That aside, I wish we had done this differently. We're clearly starting to open up everything again. Once we start, there will basically be zero appetite for anything approaching SIP if there is indeed a second wave this fall/winter. It looks like we should have the hospital capacity to deal with that when it comes but let's not pretend everyone infected and ill enough to be hospitalized has walked out so I don't know how much that really matters in terms of the death toll if we don't have anything more effective for treatment than ventilator assisted breathing and thoughts-and-prayers. For a country with our resources, we are going to have more deaths from this than we should have had. I hope all of your friends and family pull through this okay. I've got parents who are in their 70s and I'm... terrified.
Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/07/05/connecticut-to-register-voters-at-dmv-what-could-go-wrong-critics-ask/
"On Oct. 10, 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed the Motor Voter Act that automatically registers to vote every eligible California citizen who goes to a DMV office to get a driver's license or renew one."
https://themarketswork.com/2018/10/31/is-voter-fraud-real-a-look-at-californias-illegal-voter-registration-problem/
Read entire article.
Sounds like a "conservative" alright.Rushinbear said:Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.
Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.
This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.
Goobear said:As I said take politics out of it.....GivemTheAxe said:Goobear said:I could argue the Democrats want to keep it closed for the same political reasons. And there it is. Take the damn politics out of it. Neither party does have the best interests of the country as their main goal. In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Give us a break with the argument that both parties are equally at fault.
Newsom (like any rational leader) is under pressure to open the government while trying to do so under circumstances that will minimize the number of deaths. It is not an easy choice.
The choice is easy if you care only about your re-election and not about the people.
The Prez thought his entire life has been interested in only one thing HIMSELF.
Even though I consider myself a Democrat, I have long admired many many Republicans even when I disagreed with their political positions.
Most recently John McCain.
But to say that both parties are equally at fault and are equally disregarding the health safety and financial well being of the people of the United States is entirely unjustified
Agree with that concept
The Chairman of the Fed just was on 60 Minutes. Major takeaways are
1. The first $3.0 Trillion So far approved by Congress probably will probably not be enough. We probably need another $3.0 Trillion to support the unemployed, small businesses and State and local governments This is not the time to try to address the federal deficits. Deficits can be addressed when the economy gets back on its feet.
2. The economy cannot get back on its feet until the public gets comfortable that the health crises is truly under control. Is this the right time to open up? Maybe and Maybe not. (He was appointed by Trump.). But the worse thing that can happen is for there to be resurgence of the disease since the public will lose all confidence and the public agencies will have To reimpose Stay at home requirements. This would probably have a second catastrophic downturn in the US economy.
3. Major public functions with public participation such as concerts and Major sporting Events won't be back until next year unless a vaccine is discovers and distributed on a nationwide basis.
4. The economy can/should start getting back on track in the third quarter. But a "V" shaped recovery will likely NOT occur. Maybe we can get fully back on track by the END of NEXT YEAR.
I agree that we should get rid of politics In addressing the problems and deal with reality and facts.
GivemTheAxe said:Goobear said:As I said take politics out of it.....GivemTheAxe said:Goobear said:I could argue the Democrats want to keep it closed for the same political reasons. And there it is. Take the damn politics out of it. Neither party does have the best interests of the country as their main goal. In the mean time , California has better death per million out comes than Germany and is behind relative to them into opening back up...Why is that?oskidunker said:All true, sadly.GivemTheAxe said:6956bear said:
This not just about football despite the fact that this is a football message board. It is about a way of life, a culture and how to handle risk in a "free" society. There are arguments to be made about any potential decision either to open or stay in some sort of "shutdown". People have died from this, no doubt. More will, no doubt about that either. But millions have lost their jobs and businesses. More will lose their jobs going forward. The economy has been devastated. That will linger as well. Opening up will not lead to a return to normalcy.
I have stated several times that IMO Cal is unlikely to play ball this season. That will cause severe problems for the program and likely have several sports cancelled permanently. The University if shuttered will also face severe financial repercussions for years to follow.
This pandemic is a crisis no doubt. I am not dismissing its potential impact on the lives of many. Just not comfortable with the idea that some have that it can be stopped simply be destroying the American way of life. There is a cost either way. Personally I am in the camp of open up the economy. All the way. I am unwilling to live this way. It is being alive, but not living. If we knew the duration of this situation we could perhaps weather the storm. Every day I read some new prediction, a new potential threat, a second more deadly wave this Fall and Winter. All may happen or none. Nothing is truly known.
Football is a game and life can go on without it. But this idea that we should stay indoors or wear a mask 24/7 and forego any gatherings for who knows how long is not something I am willing to do much longer. I may be in the minority but I am not sure how much science actually is being employed here. This virus is new. There are no certainties a vaccine will be developed. Ever, much less in 12-18 months.
I do know this though. It is a election year and state governments are showing their hands. What started as a way to fight the pandemic is now a full fledged political football with decisions being made at the top more around politics than science. Though they will say they are using science to drive their decisions. I say nonsense to that. The medical and science communities are working hard to find a solution, but the decision to stay shuttered IMO is political.
Newsom will open when public pressure is such that he believes he no longer has the politics on his side. Things like sports and going to the beach were part of what made California a great place to live. Without those things it becomes an expensive place with all the good stuff being made unavailable.Go ahead and take that walk on the beach with your mask. Walk by the shuttered restaurants and bars. See people you know face a very uncertain future as their jobs and lives are forever changed. Play or don't play football. But this Summer will get very hot in more ways than the weather if this sheltering goes on much longer. This coming weekend is Memorial Day weekend. Marks the unofficial start of Summer. Will be interesting to watch how folks start to react when they see the political class has actually decided to take away the California way of life.
It is interesting that you come to the conclusion that political interests (whom you essentially identify As the Democrats) are trying to take away the American way of life. Essentially making the effects of the pandemic worse in an election year.
But It is the The Prez and the Republican administration that have clearly admitted their election strategy. They must open up the country immediately NOT because opening up the county is ?justified by science but because They will lose the election in November if they do not. They are willing To gamble with the lives of many Americans in order to improve their chances of winning.
They Have a long history of taking action to suppress the vote. Now they are openly resisting any efforts to allow absentee ballots and voting by mail as was already done in Wisconsin. As was done there, they want the voters to stay away from the polls on Election Day.
Give us a break with the argument that both parties are equally at fault.
Newsom (like any rational leader) is under pressure to open the government while trying to do so under circumstances that will minimize the number of deaths. It is not an easy choice.
The choice is easy if you care only about your re-election and not about the people.
The Prez thought his entire life has been interested in only one thing HIMSELF.
Even though I consider myself a Democrat, I have long admired many many Republicans even when I disagreed with their political positions.
Most recently John McCain.
But to say that both parties are equally at fault and are equally disregarding the health safety and financial well being of the people of the United States is entirely unjustified
Agree with that concept
The Chairman of the Fed just was on 60 Minutes. Major takeaways are
1. The first $3.0 Trillion So far approved by Congress probably will probably not be enough. We probably need another $3.0 Trillion to support the unemployed, small businesses and State and local governments This is not the time to try to address the federal deficits. Deficits can be addressed when the economy gets back on its feet.
2. The economy cannot get back on its feet until the public gets comfortable that the health crises is truly under control. Is this the right time to open up? Maybe and Maybe not. (He was appointed by Trump.). But the worse thing that can happen is for there to be resurgence of the disease since the public will lose all confidence and the public agencies will have To reimpose Stay at home requirements. This would probably have a second catastrophic downturn in the US economy.
3. Major public functions with public participation such as concerts and Major sporting Events won't be back until next year unless a vaccine is discovered and distributed on a nationwide basis.
4. The economy can/should start getting back on track in the third quarter. But a "V" shaped recovery will likely NOT occur. Maybe we can get fully back on track by the END of NEXT YEAR ( implying: if we do the right things).
I agree that we should get rid of politics In addressing the problems and deal with reality and facts.
Cave Bear said:Sounds like a "conservative" alright.Rushinbear said:Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.
Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.
This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.
Rushin...Rushinbear said:Cave Bear said:Sounds like a "conservative" alright.Rushinbear said:Never ask a question to which you don't know the answer.Cave Bear said:Conspicuously missing is any evidence supporting the assertions made in this ridiculous tangent.Rushinbear said:Anything's possible, even that or, that you don't know. What I have going for me (among many things) is that the states are opening their economies again. You and I will have a chance to save our financial asses. Some warn, what, what, what if we get a second wave of the virus this fall? So, you and I will give up and hand over our keys on the fear that, if it comes, we won't be able to handle it?Cave Bear said:Maybe you don't have an idea of what you're talking about.Rushinbear said:That's not what I said. It's obvious, yet you chose to call it that. Maybe you don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. Or, maybe it doesn't serve you to characterize it accurately.Cave Bear said:Perhaps you should consider the possibility that 'shoot first and ask questions later' is a modus operandi whose utility varies based on occupation and circumstance.Rushinbear said:It has made me successful in life and enabled me to be very productive and innovative. You should try it - it's liberating.GMP said:Rushinbear said:Awwww, I'm just getting cranky (some would say "getting?"). I'm tired of people endlessly spinning these contrived (yeah, I said it) scenarios and concluding with speculation about the 14 possible outcomes, all of which somehow result in bad things happening.Creeping Incrementalism said:You have a strangely menacing, hostile tone here ("admit your underlying intent" & "quarantine... figuratively" ?), but I will answer your question since I didn't explicitly say my underlying intent and it may not be what you think.Rushinbear said:There will be football this year with actions taken to minimize risk. When we have it, we trust that you will be back to admit your underlying intent.Creeping Incrementalism said:Cave Bear said:Care to share this data? The official DOD numbers for active military personnel say just 2 deaths so far from 5171 cases. And of course as with all Covid case totals, the number of actual cases is likely to be significantly higher than the confirmed case count.Creeping Incrementalism said:Quote:
It is actions that help slow the spread and can eliminate it. Trying to achieve "herd immunity" without a vaccine is crazy.
Another fact to consider is that based on the data from US Navy ships I have seen, of healthy mostly younger working age people, around 1 in 1000 infected men will die from this. So that is any one person's individual odds when they ask themselves if they are willing to risk this. And multiply that out for the total number of deaths.
https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/
I can't find the stat now. Basically 800 on the Roosevelt + 300 on the Kidd infected, with one death. Your stats are about 1 in 2500, vs 1 in 1000 my stats, same ballpark in my opinion. If Pac-12 football is played and most players get infected, I think the math comes to a likelihood of 0-2 players dead.
This disease cannot be kept out of prisons so there is no way to keep it out of football. Best hope for a vaccine is 18 months and that is iffy. So probably 2+ seasons of no football.
That is the reality of the situation. 2+ seasons of no football, or accept about one death per conference per season.
If there any infections, or God forbid, deaths, we trust that you will be back to demonstrate that they will have been as a direct result of the virus and not some presumption.
In the meantime, we trust that you will quarantine yourself in your home, literally and figuratively.
My point is if you play football, then accept either choice A) people accept the risk of this coronavirus and that most people will be infected and there will be some deaths -- or choice B) -- give up these stupid attempts to get by without getting sick. You can't train and play football or any contact sport without it becoming a bizarre charade of players and staff being unexpectedly quarantined. Realistically, how do you manage that? Will the controversies of the season be that the star quarterback was infected and showed no symptoms, so the coaches let him play anyway, and it was only discovered after the fact? Or will we have a bizarre constant rotation of 3rd string players based on who gets sick? And how can you say college students get be in close personal contact if they are athletes, but not if they are there to get an education and a forced attend class via Zoom lectures?
We used to have a saying in the Navy, "Measure with a micrometer, mark with a crayon and cut with an ax." My saying is, "Ready, fire, aim." You can't begin to anticipate future conditions in a complex system of humanity and the physical world. So, make your best guess with what you're sure of, get on with it and manage the consequences as you go. If you're sure of your data, start with that, but don't be surprised if the data weren't so stable as you thought. Otherwise, you could become a victim of Paralysis by Analysis.
Of course, this way of thinking would make irrelevant (or worse) the social sciences. I know, it's anti-intellectual...in a sea of intellect.
That this is your mantra is the least surprising thing you've ever said on here.
I'm honored that you have read some of the things I've said.
As to intent, here's what Constitutionalists like me worry about. Four years ago or more, the State of Connecticut was welcoming illegal aliens with open arms, with all the trimmings. No one knows how many but estimates are from 20K to 50K, maybe more. But, they started to cause traffic accidents, traffic infractions, DUIs, stolen cars, DUIs with injuries and a death or two. Even the newspapers couldn't ignore it. So, the State started requiring that they get driver licenses, on the rationale that the State would be better able manage the situation (including better tracking). And, being an all Democratic State (gov, legis, courts, cities, many towns), they included in the driver licensing that voter registration went with it automatically. It was no surprise that the illegal aliens chose to register as Democrats - hell, most of them were escorted to DMV by Dem ward heelers. Since virtually all illegal aliens live in the cities (sanctuaries), it is easy to monitor them and steer them in the Dem direction (usually with a little pocket $$).
Now comes the prospect of mail-in ballots. With a Dem Secy of State insisting that she has complete control and tracking of the ballots (told to me personally), the CTDStateComm has direct access to the voter rolls and ballots. With Dem-selected and paid bureaucrats, it's easy for them to lay hands on the ballots they want "in order to save the State the postage $$." Those illegal aliens that get the ballots before the DSC can intercept them are visited and the completion of the ballot is assisted since most don't speak English well enough anyway.
This is how it works and this is how it's being done in Dem cities all over the country. This is but one example of the corruption of our system. And, this is why we're fighting so hard for fairness.
And, please, don't insult us with some cultural relativity story. Just think about, please.
If voter fraud was a real systemic issue, why can't the alarmists provide evidence to demonstrate it? It's not from lack of trying. Remember the president's commission on voter fraud that spent 7 months spinning its wheels (and millions of tax dollars) trying to back up Trump's claim that millions of illegal votes were cast for Clinton? Disbanded without reporting findings. And par for the course, those running the "investigation" engaged in comically unnecessary subterfuge to arrive at their lack of findings. What possibly justifies the Republican members of the commission making the commission's documents secret? Nothing. We know that because a federal judge ordered the commission to turn the documents over. Of course Trump refused and that was the last we ever heard of any attempt by the administration to substantiate this particular dog whistle.
Heritage put together a database of all the proven voter fraud cases they could find going back over 20 years and it totals 1,285 cases. That is from all of the following causes/actions: impersonation, false registration, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots, buying votes, illegal influence at polling places, ineligible voting, altering vote counts, and ballot petition fraud. Billions of votes have been cast in local, state and federal elections over that span and all they could present were 1,285 verified cases.
This is an embarrassingly bad hill to make a stand on. Whatever point about the Covid management you think it proves becomes more suspect just by association.
Although I disagree with you most of the time, I just chalk you up as "misguided".
On this issue, you have really lost your way.
"Voter fraud" is nothing more than thinly veiled racism. It is a totally discredited accusation. Heck, even the incumbent President had to throw in the towel because the committee he appointed lacked credibility and, of course, was unable to find any wrongdoing by the opposition party. Heck, the only fraud in the last election was conducted by a Republican in North Carolina. His was not seated in Congress and his election was overturned. He did not run for the seat he vacated in the "re-do".
The efforts to suppress qualified individuals from voting is most evident in states with a history of racist policies. The effort to disenfranchise qualified minority populations in those states is an unconscionable violation of their basic rights.
Every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote regardless of their political leanings. Every state should structure their system to make it as easy as possible to vote.
Of course, here in the Golden State, we are, once again, leading the way. Nearly 70% of all ballots cast in March were by mail. The future is vote by mail. It is safe, it is easy and it enables qualified voters with an option that, in many cases, makes voting possible.
With regard to your second point about reopening the economy and the effects of a second wave, it sure would have been valuable for 60 Minutes to have asked:
What happens to the economy, the country, and to people's well-being if the country were kept under indefinite lockdown for the next several months?
What happens to the economy, the country, and to people's well-being if the country were kept under indefinite lockdown for the next several months?
Featured Stories
See All
Cal Establishes Dedicated Basketball Practice Facility
by Cal Athletics
Friday Spring Practice Notes
by Joaquin Ruiz
From Physicality to Bagels: Meet Cal's inside linebacker room
by Joaquin Ruiz
Cal Football Spring Game Set For April 18
by Cal Athletics
4 Star Sierra Canyon Safety Myles Baker Commits to Cal
by Jim McGill