Coronavirus pandemic

[kphoger]

That said, I would argue going to a place to pick up dinner or buy bulk from a restaurant is probably "safer"  than piling into a place like Costco which is now limiting purchase quantities of meat. 

When we were still in the middle of the toilet paper crisis, I read an article whose author had purchased rolls of toilet paper along with his dinner order at a now-carryout-only restaurant.

[Tonytone]

It's also worth noting that coronavirus is more severe than most other diseases that we deal with.  If you go to the hospital for the flu, you're there a few days.  If you get a severe case of coronavirus and have to go to the hospital, you're going to be in the ICU for WEEKS.  Our hospitals were not built to handle this.  They are built to rapidly turn over patients with little to no spare capacity.  Combine this with the far greater severity for the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions, and the extreme ease of spreading coronavirus, is why it tends to max out hospital capacity if allowed to spread without restrictions like social distancing and lockdowns.

I'm very aware of that.  Our good friends' cousin up in Iowa got the virus several weeks ago, and he almost died.  He got fluid in his lungs and, AIUI, he had to be kept prone on a vibrating bed in order to prevent him suffocating to death.  He still cannot speak due to damage done to his respiratory system.  I think he might still be in the hospital, but I'm not sure of that.

So you know this & still don't care?

I have to go out everyday & work.

I have to wear a mask & take it off & put it on every time I go into a public space.

Yea it's annoying. However its protecting other people as well.

Its not hard just to listen & do what told in order to get this shit over & done with.

The "trampling of rights"  is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee's.


iPhone

[vdeane]

I have to admit, I never realized how much most people eat out until this pandemic.  With the exception of their weekly trip to Proietti's for pizza (usually... sometimes they'll be different and order an entree off the menu), my parents only eat out once in a blue moon.  I eat out even less often... outside of roadtrips, eating out for me is mainly my weekly pizza/wings takeout (my parents have been making their weekly trip for longer than I've been alive; the habit stuck), especially as I view a sit-down restaurant (as opposed to fast food or fast casual) as primarily being a social affair.  Meanwhile, eating out for lunch on work days is both unhealthy and expensive, so I only do it when I'm out in the field rather than in the office.

I assumed everyone was this way.  Given the huge disruptions we had even before outbreaks at meat packing plants, I guess not.

[Roadgeekteen]

I have to admit, I never realized how much most people eat out until this pandemic.  With the exception of their weekly trip to Proietti's for pizza (usually... sometimes they'll be different and order an entree off the menu), my parents only eat out once in a blue moon.  I eat out even less often... outside of roadtrips, eating out for me is mainly my weekly pizza/wings takeout (my parents have been making their weekly trip for longer than I've been alive; the habit stuck), especially as I view a sit-down restaurant (as opposed to fast food or fast casual) as primarily being a social affair.  Meanwhile, eating out for lunch on work days is both unhealthy and expensive, so I only do it when I'm out in the field rather than in the office.

I assumed everyone was this way.  Given the huge disruptions we had even before outbreaks at meat packing plants, I guess not.

My family rarely eats out, we have been getting takeout every week during this, which is actually more than normal.

[1995hoo]

I have to admit, I never realized how much most people eat out until this pandemic.  With the exception of their weekly trip to Proietti's for pizza (usually... sometimes they'll be different and order an entree off the menu), my parents only eat out once in a blue moon.  I eat out even less often... outside of roadtrips, eating out for me is mainly my weekly pizza/wings takeout (my parents have been making their weekly trip for longer than I've been alive; the habit stuck), especially as I view a sit-down restaurant (as opposed to fast food or fast casual) as primarily being a social affair.  Meanwhile, eating out for lunch on work days is both unhealthy and expensive, so I only do it when I'm out in the field rather than in the office.

I assumed everyone was this way.  Given the huge disruptions we had even before outbreaks at meat packing plants, I guess not.

I saw something on the news about certain cities experiencing an increase in 911 calls due to people who normally eat out all the time, who tried to cook, and who didn't know what they were doing and caused fires.

[Max Rockatansky]

That said, I would argue going to a place to pick up dinner or buy bulk from a restaurant is probably "safer"  than piling into a place like Costco which is now limiting purchase quantities of meat. 

When we were still in the middle of the toilet paper crisis, I read an article whose author had purchased rolls of toilet paper along with his dinner order at a now-carryout-only restaurant.

Yes, there was a couple restaurants offering commercial toilet paper on their carry out options here as well.  We didn't need to take them up on any of that since we had excess toilet paper from the wedding last year.  Since TP-Gate started we've only gone through six rolls and have 24 left, we have about 70% of what we had to family. 

I forgot to note, partially reopening restaurants to dine in service to reopen the commercial food supply chain has been used in some local arguments here for going against state orders.  A lot of restaurants have set up screens and other safety things in place.  Modoc County made such a move first and I expect that similar local moves will he made here.  The City of Clovis might have allowed dine in service again but I haven't read their official order to see if that's the case. 

[kphoger]

It's also worth noting that coronavirus is more severe than most other diseases that we deal with.  If you go to the hospital for the flu, you're there a few days.  If you get a severe case of coronavirus and have to go to the hospital, you're going to be in the ICU for WEEKS.  Our hospitals were not built to handle this.  They are built to rapidly turn over patients with little to no spare capacity.  Combine this with the far greater severity for the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions, and the extreme ease of spreading coronavirus, is why it tends to max out hospital capacity if allowed to spread without restrictions like social distancing and lockdowns.

I'm very aware of that.  Our good friends' cousin up in Iowa got the virus several weeks ago, and he almost died.  He got fluid in his lungs and, AIUI, he had to be kept prone on a vibrating bed in order to prevent him suffocating to death.  He still cannot speak due to damage done to his respiratory system.  I think he might still be in the hospital, but I'm not sure of that.

So you know this & still don't care?

I have to go out everyday & work.

I have to wear a mask & take it off & put it on every time I go into a public space.

Yea it's annoying. However its protecting other people as well.

Its not hard just to listen & do what told in order to get this shit over & done with.

The "trampling of rights"  is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee's.

When have I said I don't care?  Disagreeing with the measures being implemented doesn't mean I don't care.

[Max Rockatansky]

It's also worth noting that coronavirus is more severe than most other diseases that we deal with.  If you go to the hospital for the flu, you're there a few days.  If you get a severe case of coronavirus and have to go to the hospital, you're going to be in the ICU for WEEKS.  Our hospitals were not built to handle this.  They are built to rapidly turn over patients with little to no spare capacity.  Combine this with the far greater severity for the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions, and the extreme ease of spreading coronavirus, is why it tends to max out hospital capacity if allowed to spread without restrictions like social distancing and lockdowns.

I'm very aware of that.  Our good friends' cousin up in Iowa got the virus several weeks ago, and he almost died.  He got fluid in his lungs and, AIUI, he had to be kept prone on a vibrating bed in order to prevent him suffocating to death.  He still cannot speak due to damage done to his respiratory system.  I think he might still be in the hospital, but I'm not sure of that.

So you know this & still don't care?

I have to go out everyday & work.

I have to wear a mask & take it off & put it on every time I go into a public space.

Yea it's annoying. However its protecting other people as well.

Its not hard just to listen & do what told in order to get this shit over & done with.

The "trampling of rights"  is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee's.


iPhone

Note; I know this wasn't directed at me but I'll opine anyways. 

Personally I know at least a half dozen people who have had COVID-19 or were being investigated.  I know at least another half dozen who have reasonable arguments (myself included) to believe they had COVID-19 before Virus-Time exploded in California.  To that end, I'm finding myself caring far less if the restrictions continue, but I do abide them.  I do think that locally they need to start loosening up to a degree and not everything is a "one size fits all."   I'm noticing there is a lot of similar sentiments in my immediate family, especially after what happened with my Uncle recently passing of heart disease.  It almost feels like people have forgotten en masse that there are tons of ways life ends besides the Coronavirus.  My view is only solidified by the fact that I have a ton of family and friends out of work right now, they need the money.   

At some point life has to start carrying on, even if that carries considerably risk.  I think we are far past the point of "stopping"  the virus and probably the best that can be done minimize the impacts.  The trouble is that society will have to adapt to operating under this current pandemic somehow or the economic effects will be just as worse if not more so than the disease.  Sitting around forever is and not finding a way to adapt isn't the way to do things.  It seems like that a lot of people who want the restrictions to continue in full force believe everyone else somehow doesn't care people are getting sick.  I've frequently observed that crowd resorting "social shaming"  to ensure compliance to their views. 

[Brandon]

The “trampling of rights” is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee’s.

No, it isn't.  It's partially because these folks who were working now can't feed their families and have a choice between opening up and maybe catching the virus, or keeping closed and definitely starving.  Have some empathy and consideration for the 25% suddenly thrown out of their lower-paying jobs and working paycheck-to-paycheck.  Not everyone is in an "essential" business or capable of working from home.

[Tonytone]

The “trampling of rights” is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee’s.

No, it isn't.  It's partially because these folks who were working now can't feed their families and have a choice between opening up and maybe catching the virus, or keeping closed and definitely starving.  Have some empathy and consideration for the 25% suddenly thrown out of their lower-paying jobs and working paycheck-to-paycheck.  Not everyone is in an "essential" business or capable of working from home.

I believe they should start letting people go back to work. They already are. But majority posts Ive seen (not on here) are people complaining about not being able to go out & "do things" . That may be a small percentage of people saying that.


iPhone

[NWI_Irish96]

The “trampling of rights” is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee’s.

No, it isn't.  It's partially because these folks who were working now can't feed their families and have a choice between opening up and maybe catching the virus, or keeping closed and definitely starving.  Have some empathy and consideration for the 25% suddenly thrown out of their lower-paying jobs and working paycheck-to-paycheck.  Not everyone is in an "essential" business or capable of working from home.

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

[Brandon]

At some point life has to start carrying on, even if that carries considerably risk.  I think we are far past the point of "stopping"  the virus and probably the best that can be done minimize the impacts.  The trouble is that society will have to adapt to operating under this current pandemic somehow or the economic effects will be just as worse if not more so than the disease.  Sitting around forever is and not finding a way to adapt isn't the way to do things.  It seems like that a lot of people who want the restrictions to continue in full force believe everyone else somehow doesn't care people are getting sick.  I've frequently observed that crowd resorting "social shaming"  to ensure compliance to their views. 

Exactly.  We are going to have to learn to live with it instead of staying shutdown/shut in forever.  I'm a bit sick of the social shaming stuff I've seen in the media and on places like Facebook with no acknowledgement from those doing the shaming that there are others out there who fear being hungry and broke more than they fear this virus.  These folks who want everything shutdown (seemingly forever) seem to lack a lot of empathy for those who have been tossed out of their jobs.  That means, as we are currently, they have lost healthcare insurance, cannot make their rent or mortgage, cannot pay their utility bills, and in some cases, have gone without food to make sure their kids eat.  I count myself as one of the lucky ones, able to work for an "essential" business from home.  But, I have neighbors who have had their hours cut, or lost their jobs completely.  And to tell some of these folks tossed out of jobs to just find a new one is just cold, as it isn't all that easy.  The jobs out there for the taking are much lower-paying than they have had, and do not match the skill sets these folks have.

[Brandon]

The "trampling of rights"  is just people whining because they cant go to Applebee's.

No, it isn't.  It's partially because these folks who were working now can't feed their families and have a choice between opening up and maybe catching the virus, or keeping closed and definitely starving.  Have some empathy and consideration for the 25% suddenly thrown out of their lower-paying jobs and working paycheck-to-paycheck.  Not everyone is in an "essential" business or capable of working from home.

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

Define how the government is to "do its job" here?  Even government income (at all levels) is way down due to the lack of incoming taxes.  As an example, there's some serious discussion about putting off road projects here in Illinois (a state which seriously needs to rebuild and upgrade its system) due to the lack of gas tax money coming in.

[kphoger]

Our good friends' cousin up in Iowa got the virus several weeks ago, and he almost died.  He got fluid in his lungs and, AIUI, he had to be kept prone on a vibrating bed in order to prevent him suffocating to death.  He still cannot speak due to damage done to his respiratory system.  I think he might still be in the hospital, but I'm not sure of that.

So you know this & still don't care?

It almost feels like people have forgotten en masse that there are tons of ways life ends besides the Coronavirus.  My view is only solidified by the fact that I have a ton of family and friends out of work right now, they need the money.   

At some point life has to start carrying on, even if that carries considerably risk.  I think we are far past the point of "stopping"  the virus and probably the best that can be done minimize the impacts.  The trouble is that society will have to adapt to operating under this current pandemic somehow or the economic effects will be just as worse if not more so than the disease.  Sitting around forever is and not finding a way to adapt isn't the way to do things.  It seems like that a lot of people who want the restrictions to continue in full force believe everyone else somehow doesn't care people are getting sick.  I've frequently observed that crowd resorting "social shaming"  to ensure compliance to their views. 

It's partially because these folks who were working now can't feed their families and have a choice between opening up and maybe catching the virus, or keeping closed and definitely starving.  Have some empathy and consideration for the 25% suddenly thrown out of their lower-paying jobs and working paycheck-to-paycheck.  Not everyone is in an "essential" business or capable of working from home.

This, this, and this a thousand times more.  It's not that I don't care about the sick and dying.  It's that I also care about other things too, such as the loss of livelihood for millions of Americans for one thing.  I also care about rights and freedoms.

Heck, the only person I personally know who has specifically suggested disobeying the 10-person state limit was that very friend whose cousin nearly died from the virus.  Surely you aren't going to accuse him of "not caring" about his cousin, are you?

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

That all depends on what you believe the role of government is, and that's quite overtly a political topic.  We've already been admonished to keep the politics out of this discussion, so let's let that one lie, OK?

[kalvado]

At some point life has to start carrying on, even if that carries considerably risk.  I think we are far past the point of "stopping"  the virus and probably the best that can be done minimize the impacts.  The trouble is that society will have to adapt to operating under this current pandemic somehow or the economic effects will be just as worse if not more so than the disease.  Sitting around forever is and not finding a way to adapt isn't the way to do things.  It seems like that a lot of people who want the restrictions to continue in full force believe everyone else somehow doesn't care people are getting sick.  I've frequently observed that crowd resorting "social shaming"  to ensure compliance to their views. 

Exactly.  We are going to have to learn to live with it instead of staying shutdown/shut in forever.  I'm a bit sick of the social shaming stuff I've seen in the media and on places like Facebook with no acknowledgement from those doing the shaming that there are others out there who fear being hungry and broke more than they fear this virus.  These folks who want everything shutdown (seemingly forever) seem to lack a lot of empathy for those who have been tossed out of their jobs.  That means, as we are currently, they have lost healthcare insurance, cannot make their rent or mortgage, cannot pay their utility bills, and in some cases, have gone without food to make sure their kids eat.  I count myself as one of the lucky ones, able to work for an "essential" business from home.  But, I have neighbors who have had their hours cut, or lost their jobs completely.  And to tell some of these folks tossed out of jobs to just find a new one is just cold, as it isn't all that easy.  The jobs out there for the taking are much lower-paying than they have had, and do not match the skill sets these folks have.

Thing is, even with the mid-scale reopening, a lot of low-paying jobs will not come back. Waiters may be the ones hurt most, retail was already struggling - and at least Amazon should be hiring to compensate for that. 
I suspect, a whole new layer of social net would have to appear - somewhat similar to a "Year without a summer" basically setting up a concept of social security in Europe.
The other aspect of the continued shutdown is purely material. While some things may be done from home, tangible goods production and distribution require people to physically do something - at least some people. I am mostly concerned about the agricultural aspect of it. Even with most advanced social security system, there will be a problem if corn, wheat, potatoes are not harvested...

[kphoger]

I am mostly concerned about the agricultural aspect of it. Even with most advanced social security system, there will be a problem if corn, wheat, potatoes are not harvested...

Such a catastrophe would be similar to a region-wide drought, wouldn't it?  If so, then most farmers would be able to weather it.  The friends I was talking about earlier (whose cousin is still in bad shape from the virus) just got back from visiting family in the farm country of southwestern Kansas.  If I can catch whichever one of them is picking up their kids from our house today, I'll ask what they've heard recently about the ag impact.

[kalvado]

I am mostly concerned about the agricultural aspect of it. Even with most advanced social security system, there will be a problem if corn, wheat, potatoes are not harvested...

Such a catastrophe would be similar to a region-wide drought, wouldn't it?  If so, then most farmers would be able to weather it.  The friends I was talking about earlier (whose cousin is still in bad shape from the virus) just got back from visiting family in the farm country of southwestern Kansas.  If I can catch whichever one of them is picking up their kids from our house today, I'll ask what they've heard recently about the ag impact.

More like worldwide drought.

[kphoger]

More like worldwide drought.

I was assuming not every corner of the globe would lose a year's harvest.

[kalvado]

More like worldwide drought.

I was assuming not every corner of the globe would lose a year's harvest.

I don't know how much spare crops world has. Would we be OK with 10% loss? 25%? 50%?
Apparently, using wheat and corn to feed people instead of chicken and cattle may help, but again, that may be an interesting development to see.

[Max Rockatansky]

Wall Street Journal piece on California beginning Phase 2 of reopening.  Weird to see Fresno used as a talking point in a publication that large:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/californias-lockdown-liberation-11588721029

[NWI_Irish96]

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

That all depends on what you believe the role of government is, and that's quite overtly a political topic.  We've already been admonished to keep the politics out of this discussion, so let's let that one lie, OK?

The problem is that it shouldn't be political.  It shouldn't be a political issue as to whether or not the government takes care of people who can't work because it's not safe to do so.

[kphoger]

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

That all depends on what you believe the role of government is, and that's quite overtly a political topic.  We've already been admonished to keep the politics out of this discussion, so let's let that one lie, OK?

The problem is that it shouldn't be political.  It shouldn't be a political issue as to whether or not the government takes care of people who can't work because it's not safe to do so.

It is, though.  It's the difference between big government and small government, between a large social safety net and a limited social safety net.  That's a political topic.  Not everyone believes it's the government's job to "take care" of you.  Enough said.

[GaryV]

and at least Amazon should be hiring to compensate for that. 

My son worked at Amazon for a couple weeks after he was laid off from his job.  They called him back when his employer got a PPP loan, and he jumped for it.  He had heard that the new hires at Amazon would be laid off once things started back toward normal, and all the existing Amazon employees who took a voluntary layoff to stay away from others started coming back to work.

[Brandon]

More like worldwide drought.

I was assuming not every corner of the globe would lose a year's harvest.

I don't know how much spare crops world has. Would we be OK with 10% loss? 25%? 50%?
Apparently, using wheat and corn to feed people instead of chicken and cattle may help, but again, that may be an interesting development to see.

The other part of this equation is that the US and Canada provide much of the world's grain, be it soybeans, corn, or wheat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maize#Production
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_wheat_production_statistics This one is most interesting and most telling, IMHO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wheat_exports
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_soybean_production

If we here in North America cannot produce grains, then a lot of the world will starve.

[NWI_Irish96]

If the government did its job people wouldn't have to choose between safety and income.

That all depends on what you believe the role of government is, and that's quite overtly a political topic.  We've already been admonished to keep the politics out of this discussion, so let's let that one lie, OK?

The problem is that it shouldn't be political.  It shouldn't be a political issue as to whether or not the government takes care of people who can't work because it's not safe to do so.

It is, though.  It's the difference between big government and small government, between a large social safety net and a limited social safety net.  That's a political topic.  Not everyone believes it's the government's job to "take care" of you.  Enough said.

Perhaps I'm not framing it properly.  It's ridiculous that normal political positions, right or left, can't be set aside temporarily for a crisis.  It's a sign that people have let ideology override common sense.