Lockdown Fans: What Is Your Endgame Plan?

[HappyJoy]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

I doubt it will be painfully obvious, since I'm sure you leftists will continue to go out of your way to spread more lies about it.

What lie did I spread?

Don't give me this shit about "We've worked really hard to panic people and convince them of bullshit, and now you have to treat our lies like truth because look how many people have bought it" and expect me to fall in line.

What bullshit were people convinced of?

Was it that lie about going from 15 to nearly zero cases?
Was it the lie that the cupboards were bare and Obama didn't leave Trump a test for a virus that didn't yet exist?
Was it the lie that anyone could get a test for anytime they like?
Was it the lie that the WH set guidelines for reopening only for the president to ignore them when red states chose to open too early?
Was it the lie that nobody could have predicted this pandemic when the WH was alerted repeatedly?

There's more missteps along the way but where is the documented evidence that social distancing does not slow the spread of the virus? You seem to think that's not true, you ignored my link about the subject.

No instead let's have a bunch of wingnut assholes protesting measures that work and shaming people on facebook for wearing a face mask or pretending their 2nd amendment rights are once again under siege.

Fucking waste of space you guys are.

Enough deflection. You've wasted pages of posts trying to make this about virtue signaling and demonization instead of addressing the topic.

So if you don't want to reopen, tell us what your plan looks for to remain locked down. You want to preen yourself on how you care so much more for people and locking down is "what good people think"? Then EARN your self-flattery and tell me what you plan to do besides running your gums.

Enough with the sophistry and lies.

No one doesn’t want to reopen.

We should end following the guidelines when the facts and data support doing so, not because conservatives are afraid of losing the WH and Senate this November.

You just admitted the real motive for the shutdown: You believe it will help you regain the WH and Senate.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Have you ever thought about reading before replying?

I do. I also read between the lines.

I'm sure that booger you call a brain reads a little too much into everything.

 

[bripat9643]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

They can pay months. Much better than bailing out corporations. Deficit spending in times of economic crisis are quite normal. Of course since Trump was already exploding the deficit beforehand that complicates things.

The couldn't even pay for 2 weeks worth in the last "stimulus" package, moron. The cost would probably be $1 trillion per month.

 

[bripat9643]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

I doubt it will be painfully obvious, since I'm sure you leftists will continue to go out of your way to spread more lies about it.

What lie did I spread?

Don't give me this shit about "We've worked really hard to panic people and convince them of bullshit, and now you have to treat our lies like truth because look how many people have bought it" and expect me to fall in line.

What bullshit were people convinced of?

Was it that lie about going from 15 to nearly zero cases?
Was it the lie that the cupboards were bare and Obama didn't leave Trump a test for a virus that didn't yet exist?
Was it the lie that anyone could get a test for anytime they like?
Was it the lie that the WH set guidelines for reopening only for the president to ignore them when red states chose to open too early?
Was it the lie that nobody could have predicted this pandemic when the WH was alerted repeatedly?

There's more missteps along the way but where is the documented evidence that social distancing does not slow the spread of the virus? You seem to think that's not true, you ignored my link about the subject.

No instead let's have a bunch of wingnut assholes protesting measures that work and shaming people on facebook for wearing a face mask or pretending their 2nd amendment rights are once again under siege.

Fucking waste of space you guys are.

Enough deflection. You've wasted pages of posts trying to make this about virtue signaling and demonization instead of addressing the topic.

So if you don't want to reopen, tell us what your plan looks for to remain locked down. You want to preen yourself on how you care so much more for people and locking down is "what good people think"? Then EARN your self-flattery and tell me what you plan to do besides running your gums.

Enough with the sophistry and lies.

No one doesn’t want to reopen.

We should end following the guidelines when the facts and data support doing so, not because conservatives are afraid of losing the WH and Senate this November.

You just admitted the real motive for the shutdown: You believe it will help you regain the WH and Senate.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Have you ever thought about reading before replying?

I do. I also read between the lines.

I'm sure that booger you call a brain reads a little too much into everything.

Not at all. I understand that you don't want people to know what motivates your idiotic agenda.

 

[Polishprince]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

They can pay months. Much better than bailing out corporations. Deficit spending in times of economic crisis are quite normal. Of course since Trump was already exploding the deficit beforehand that complicates things.

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

 

[bripat9643]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

They can pay months. Much better than bailing out corporations. Deficit spending in times of economic crisis are quite normal. Of course since Trump was already exploding the deficit beforehand that complicates things.

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

Where will people work when 90% of all businesses have gone bankrupt?

 

[HappyJoy]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

The majority of counties in the United States have Zero deaths, and many of the rest have very few. Should they be allowed to open immediately, as they haven't even been affected? You can't have a decline when you are already at Zero.

I'd leave that up to the individual governors how they want to handle their least populated portions of their state.

How about those areas with sizable populations that haven't been much affected, like here in Mercer County with a population of 100,000 and just 2 deaths. Minimally affected?

Same answer.

 

[Polishprince]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

They can pay months. Much better than bailing out corporations. Deficit spending in times of economic crisis are quite normal. Of course since Trump was already exploding the deficit beforehand that complicates things.

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

Where will people work when 90% of all businesses have gone bankrupt?

It won't just be the businesses going bankrupt, it will also be the landlords and the banks, who won't be able to stay solvent if the businesses can't pay their rent or the loans without any revenue.

 

[HappyJoy]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

It'll cost trillions.

 

[meaner gene]

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

They should have a working vaccine by the end of the year. That would allow full normal at that point.

 

[meaner gene]

Where will people work when 90% of all businesses have gone bankrupt?

The very definition of small business are businesses that people start up to meet a need. If the old nail salon went bankrupt, the new nail salon will take it's place.

 

[Polishprince]

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

They should have a working vaccine by the end of the year. That would allow full normal at that point.

That would be pretty quick action and it would be doubtable if it would come down that quick, but that would still be more than 9 months of lockdown which would crush a lot of banks, businesses, landlords. And then, of course, the precedent is set. Next year, many a new flu bug that kills people .

 

[bripat9643]

Where will people work when 90% of all businesses have gone bankrupt?

The very definition of small business are businesses that people start up to meet a need. If the old nail salon went bankrupt, the new nail salon will take it's place.

Your compassion is awesome, turd. How long will it take for all these new business to become established do you suppose? Two years? 5 years?

 

[bripat9643]

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

They should have a working vaccine by the end of the year. That would allow full normal at that point.

8 months? You're fucking insane.

 

[meaner gene]

It won't just be the businesses going bankrupt, it will also be the landlords and the banks, who won't be able to stay solvent if the businesses can't pay their rent or the loans without any revenue.

The free market has a solution. Banks as primary lenders get first bite of the apple. The landlords will probably get screwed, but then their properties become prime opportunity for somebody to buy them at auction prices.

 

[Polishprince]

Where will people work when 90% of all businesses have gone bankrupt?

The very definition of small business are businesses that people start up to meet a need. If the old nail salon went bankrupt, the new nail salon will take it's place.

I doubt it. People will start setting up shop in their homes and doing nails and hair on the QT. A new nail salon would have a hard time getting market share, in addition to being a very risk enterprise for a bank to loan to or a landlord to rent to. The possibility of a pandemic would make it too risky

 

[bripat9643]

Americans, by a large 30-point margin, are resistant to re-opening the country now, believing the risk to human life of opening the country outweighs the economic toll of remaining under restrictive lockdowns -- a concern that starkly divides along partisan lines, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos released Friday. ​

It's not the only poll showing this result either. I know, I know, you've been programmed to disregard any information you don't want to be true but your confirmation bias is not my problem.

The polls only indicate that the 24/7 news cycle of alarmism regarding the corona panic has swayed the opinion of a lot of people.

As people see things open up in Georgia, in Mississippi and other forward thinking parts of the country, their opinions will change. And that's why radicals on the coast are fighting the efforts of people in the interior to get back to normalcy.

Yeah, people aren't as dumb as you. When they see the virus spike in places like Georgia it's going to be painfully obvious why.

What "spike?"

Georgia cases are increasing. Wait for the spike because with their economy allegedly opening the outcome is going to be pretty obvious. Georgia already has more cases and deaths per capita than California by almost double.

I'm sure you hope that will be the case, but my guess is that the opening of the Great State of Georgia will occur with no particular problems at all, leading other states to follow suit. Maybe not Far Left New York, but other, forward thinking states.

No, my hope would be that COVID will mutate out of existence but you can't count on hope.

There is not a shred of evidence that supports opening up will lead to fewer cases, quite the opposite.

So far as I can tell, there has been no evidence actually suggesting that lockdowns lead to fewer cases and/or fewer deaths, either. Which makes sense, since they were never intended for that purpose. The lockdowns were only ever supposed to delay cases and spread them out over time, so that the hospitals wouldn't be overrun. The models never suggested that the eventual end totals wouldn't be the same either way.

As far as I can tell you didn't really look.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-05-08/big-decline-in-wash-state-coronavirus-cases-after-stay-home-orders

As far as I can tell, you didn't really think. Washington has been locked down, but it's still generating cases.

We're moving the goal posts then? Did Washington reduce their cases due to social distancing or not? They did. Actually most places that effectively practiced social distancing and stay at home have reduced their cases or kept them low. San Francisco Bay Area, Washington State, Michigan and the NYC area are all seeing reductions in new cases yet if you remove those areas the remaining population of the U.S. is still going up.

Here is what is happening in NYC vs the rest of the United States. By reopening further it's just going to push much of the country back up.

View attachment 333918

Where are those coming from, if lockdowns utterly prevent people from getting sick like you keep pretending? Where is the model showing us that the end total number of cases is going to be lower? EVERY model indicates that, months down the road (barring a deus ex machina), the exact same number of people are going to have been infected. The only difference is whether they get infected now, or a month from now.

Did I ever say that stay at home measures alone reduce cases to zero immediately? No, why are you lying and saying I did? Very disingenuous of you or perhaps you're just not that bright. Which one?

Exact same number will be infected? That sounds whimsical.

So what is your suggestion? That places with zero deaths or very few deaths should close and not open until after New York does?

No, according to Trump's guidelines they should see 14 days of straight decline, most states haven't. I would actually say 4 weeks but hey, who am I?

You're a retired old coot who doesn't need to earn a living and who doesn't care if people starve and lose everything they have ever worked for.

I'm old and retired? That's news to me. I do earn a living and I'm still working. I've also managed to generate wealth and save so in those respects I am very fortunate. Though the way you're shitting on people living in retirement I'm not surprised if you don't care if they live or not.

Anyway, I understand insulin is expensive so I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

So you have a source of income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

Did I say that? Nope.

What a fucking douchebag. Everyone in here who supports the shutdown has an income that isn't affected by the shutdown.

How noble of you to tell other people they aren't allowed to work.

I think temporarily the government should pay wages for those who lose their job. I don't mind my taxes eventually going up for that, more than happy to pay them.

ROFL! How many weeks do you imagine the government can pay everyone their wages?

You people are totally fucking insane.

It'll cost trillions.

Tens of trillions. Then we'll spend the next 1000 years trying to pay it off.

You're mentally disturbed if you believe that's a viable plan.

 

[Polishprince]

It won't just be the businesses going bankrupt, it will also be the landlords and the banks, who won't be able to stay solvent if the businesses can't pay their rent or the loans without any revenue.

The free market has a solution. Banks as primary lenders get first bite of the apple. The landlords will probably get screwed, but then their properties become prime opportunity for somebody to buy them at auction prices.

Actually, both parties will get screwed if there is next to no money. Further, the landlord might be in a better position as leases give them a right to possess the equipment on the premises in case of default. And it is their premises.

 

[meaner gene]

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

They should have a working vaccine by the end of the year. That would allow full normal at that point.

That would be pretty quick action and it would be doubtable if it would come down that quick, but that would still be more than 9 months of lockdown which would crush a lot of banks, businesses, landlords. And then, of course, the precedent is set. Next year, many a new flu bug that kills people .

Actually pandemics only happen infrequently. Once we have a covid-19 vaccine, we'll be down to the normal seasonal flu's. And if everybody wises up and gets all their shots, things would return to normal.

 

[meaner gene]

The very definition of small business are businesses that people start up to meet a need. If the old nail salon went bankrupt, the new nail salon will take it's place.

Your compassion is awesome, turd. How long will it take for all these new business to become established do you suppose? Two years? 5 years?

What does compassion have to do with it. It's pure keynesian economics. And the more businesses that go bankrupt, the easier it is to replace them.
People will be able to buy a startup business at a tax auction.

 

[meaner gene]

How many months? Six months? 12 months? 24 months? And how will you start back up when this is over?

They should have a working vaccine by the end of the year. That would allow full normal at that point.

8 months? You're fucking insane.

They know the development cycle, and people like Bill Gates are working on the production end. So as soon as they have a working vaccine, it will weeks instead of months, to ramp up the numbers.