If the decision was yours...

[sb1212]

25 minutes ago, pfunk said:

Do you really believe we should keep the country, as it currently functions, for 18 to 24 months? 

That's not happening (and I know you aren't advocating that position)  The country won't exist in 18 months if we maintain status quo. We need to take some calculated risks in order to get the economy and the country rolling.   Yes, more will die. That will be true under any circumstances.  40,000 died in car accidents last year. More will die that way this year. Should we ban driving? 

[ilovewomen]

On 4/19/2020 at 5:50 PM, Old_Timer said:

All we need is a cheap (accurate) antibody test.

Pass the test, go to work.

Fail the test, goto self imposed 2-week quarantine.

Mayor Hancock has a goal of being able to test 2,000 people per week. With population of 560,000 in Denver proper, that will take 280 weeks....over 5 years.

Is anybody ready to wait 5 years to restart the economy?

[ilovewomen]

We can’t wait 18-24 months  for a vaccine. The economy will not exist in 12 months if we stay closed.

Rigjt now we are at weeks and unemployment has risen from almost nothing to 4.4 percent at the end of March...even higher today.

Ecinomists are predicting an unemployment rates of 20% if we stay closed another 2-3 months and over 35% if we stay closed 6 months. To put that number in perspective, during the Great Depression the unemployment rate was 25%.

If we wait until the end of the year to reopen as some people want, there will be nothing to reopen. There won’t be any jobs.  Starvation and homelessness will be the norm.

Think about this...since we closed up in mid March, over 22 million people filed for unemployment. This number is only going to increase as we stay closed.

I don’t want to be one of people...do you?

 

[Audrey Astor]

I’m not sure of the correct answer. I think the logical answer is to proceed with caution. If things were to continue status quo, I envision an anarchy like scenario happening. 

[JRWolfe]

6 hours ago, Laci French said:

Keeping the stay at home order in place for 12-18 months would lead to a complete economic collapse.

 

 

  no doubt that we are headed towards a second great depression.

[JRWolfe]

7 hours ago, pfunk said:

Do you really believe we should keep the country, as it currently functions, for 18 to 24 months? 

        You have a better suggestion ?

[Bit Banger]

49 minutes ago, JRWolfe said:

        You have a better suggestion ?

Yes, protect those most at risk while letting others go on about their business. Some will get sick; some will die.  We can’t save everyone!  The current lockdown has allowed resources to be gathered for dealing with these issues.

Not this country (or any other) can stand to be shut down for 6-18 months.  And the world cannot stand for the US to be shut down that long either.  Even this 6-8 week interruption is going to have repercussions for years to come.

[ilovewomen]

I agree Bit.  We can’t save everyone. But we can save the United States, the economy and a form of our life prior to Covid 19 by getting the country open ASAP.

 I make that statement knowing that I am in extreme risk category. 

I make that statement for my adult children and grandson so that they have something to live with.

Being in the extreme risk category doesn’t mean that I am more likely to get the virus than a healthy 20/30/40 year old. They can get it as easily as I can. It just means that I am more like to suffer extreme symptoms. As a result, I have been cautious during this time.

If we don’t open up ASAP, there will be NOTHING for our kids, grandchildren and their children. 

[Seeker5280]

I’m sorry to say this.......

Over time a large group of us will get this crap.

The more inter relating we do will reduce it.......

am I wrong?

[Bit Banger]

ILW, I’m also a member of that risk group.  No one in my enclave has come down w/C19, but we all practice social distancing and wear masks w/in the compound.

[JRWolfe]

2 hours ago, Bit Banger said:

Yes, protect those most at risk while letting others go on about their business. Some will get sick; some will die.  We can’t save everyone!  The current lockdown has allowed resources to be gathered for dealing with these issues.

Not this country (or any other) can stand to be shut down for 6-18 months.  And the world cannot stand for the US to be shut down that long either.  Even this 6-8 week interruption is going to have repercussions for years to come.

  First person diagnosed with it was in January,we went into lock down in March..and we have how many in hospitals and how many dead this fast ? 

We are all at risk.

[Guest]

Imma need some of you “at risk” people so keen on sending everyone else out restart the economy to go ahead and join the parade.
 

How about this; since we know there will be plenty of jobs and people maybe cautious in taking the most risky ones like grocery store workers, malls, service industry, and really anything else that would expose you to others at high frequency you guys take. You forgo your social security, Medicare or Medicaid (whichever you old people get), special shopping hours, and whatever other senior discounts and benefits currently receive. Employers only have to provide basic insurance if they have so many employees so there’s no guarantee there but you can always purchase your own on the free market. Or don’t since it’s not required. 

If you have adult children you should also move in with them. As many have said we’re all likely going to get it (might as well expose them early and quickly!) and if they’re young and have young kids they’re likely not going to die. But even if they do die, as sad as that maybe, I’m reminded of the mantra “some people will in fact die.” Now if you should get sick and need hospitalization you will be required to figure out how you’re going to pay for that care. And how you will maintain your job during that absence.  If you should pass while performing an act for the greater good that is the economy and future of your children, grandchildren, and even great grandchildren then know they will receive a plaque with your name on it and a ridiculously large hospital bill. Someone has to pay that after all. But do not fret! Your sacrifice in restarting the economy will never be forgotten. 
 

Volunteers?

Edited April 23, 2020 by JoDoe27

[Old_Timer]

12 hours ago, ilovewomen said:

Mayor Hancock has a goal of being able to test 2,000 people per week. With population of 560,000 in Denver proper, that will take 280 weeks....over 5 years.

Is anybody ready to wait 5 years to restart the economy?

Of course not.

Mayor Hancock is dealing with a shortage of tests.

We need to test thousands a day, not a week. As I said, we need cheap tests and lots of them. Maybe a reagent strip like you'd use to test blood sugar, or the chlorine level in a pool. I don't know how-- leave the how to the medical engineers.

And everyone does not need to have a test. Me, I'm not going to work. Those days are over for me so I'm low priority. I can wander around in a mask and gloves until there's time for me to get a test.

If you want to return to a full economy, this should be a priority.

[Bit Banger]

Sorry, JoDoe, but one of the reasons I’m ‘at risk’ is that I got poisoned (Agent Orange) the last time I volunteered.  I think I’ll stay inside as much as I can so that I don’t become a burden on the medical system.

So let’s look at what happens if we reach 25%  unemployment and hold it for 6 months. The mortgage defaults will make the ‘08 meltdown look like a freeze.  Oh, we’ll just forgive those who can’t pay their rent, but that puts their landlord in a bind and their maintenance staff out of work. Oh, well the Feds can print more money and send everybody  checks.  Do you have your wheelbarrow ready to haul the cash for your next loaf of bread? Or you could use sawbucks for that missing TP.  How much hard currency do you have? Mr. T had this one right. (Gold chain is better than coins because you can break off a link to pay for small items.  A lesson from the Argentine collapse.)

Edited April 23, 2020 by Bit Banger

[Old_Timer]

12 hours ago, Seeker5280 said:

I’m sorry to say this.......

Over time a large group of us will get this crap.

The more inter relating we do will reduce it.......

am I wrong?

What happens when they run out of ventilators?

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Bit Banger said:

Sorry, JoDoe, but one of the reasons I’m ‘at risk’ is that I got poisoned (Agent Orange) the last time I volunteered.  I think I’ll stay inside as much as I can so that I don’t become a burden on the medical system.

So let’s look at what happens if we reach 25%  unemployment and hold it for 6 months. The mortgage defaults will make the ‘08 meltdown look like a freeze.  Oh, we’ll just forgive those who can’t pay their rent, but that puts their landlord in a bind and their maintenance staff out of work. Oh, well the Feds can print more money and send everybody  checks.  Do you have your wheelbarrow ready to haul the cash for your next loaf of bread? Or you could use sawbucks for that missing TP.  How much hard currency do you have? Mr. T had this one right. (Gold chain is better than coins because you can break off a link to pay for small items.  A lesson from the Argentine collapse.)

I understand things have to restart. I do. It’s not feasible to go 18 months or even another 6 months for that matter. I definitely understand that. I was just saying if I’m expected to go back out there for the sake of the economy at the behest of those opting to stay home and safe then they too should just come on out and join the fun. “Many will die” feels a lot different when It’s a possibility you and your loved ones might be part of those figures. 
 

Since the Great Depression is often the comparison it took about a decade if I remember correctly for things to turn around with the New Deal being a major catalyst. I’m the grandson of depression era grandparents. The idea that “we have to do this for future of our grandkids” feels a little anemic when we’re right back where they started (if that’s the economic comparison). And even more frustrating when people are eager to get back to normal when clearly what was normal doesn’t necessarily work when scrutinized or put to the test. Oh, and there’s 0 plan for those us going back out there to test the waters.

[Bit Banger]

17 minutes ago, JoDoe27 said:

. 
 

Since the Great Depression is often the comparison it took about a decade if I remember correctly for things to turn around with the New Deal being a major catalyst.

Don’t forget that WW II was also a major catalyst for ending the Great Deppression.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Bit Banger said:

Don’t forget that WW II was also a major catalyst for ending the Great Deppression.

Nothing like a good! I’m being sarcastic of course. The ending of the war is probably better attributed to the ending of the Great Depression. Government spending during didn’t really contribute or doesn’t equal consumer spending. And the government’s spending during that time was simply added to the GDP. Increased taxes and borrowing from the government to fund a war effort doesn’t necessarily stimulate the economy. 

[pfunk]

24 minutes ago, JoDoe27 said:

Nothing like a good! I’m being sarcastic of course. The ending of the war is probably better attributed to the ending of the Great Depression. Government spending during didn’t really contribute or doesn’t equal consumer spending. And the government’s spending during that time was simply added to the GDP. Increased taxes and borrowing from the government to fund a war effort doesn’t necessarily stimulate the economy. 

I'm sure glad you're not an economics, or history, professor. You have no clue what you're talking about.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, pfunk said:

I'm sure glad you're not an economics, or history, professor. You have no clue what you're talking about.

Please educate me then. Seriously, tell me how a war and a war funds would lead to an economic boom when a lot of the jobs during that time would’ve been for the war effort. There was definitely a drop in unemployment but the economic boom came after the war ended. So we traded unemployment for debt, right? Literal fact: the national debt went from  49 billion at the start of the war to ~260billion at the end. 

Edited April 23, 2020 by JoDoe27

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, JoDoe27 said:

Please educate me then. Seriously, tell me how a war and a war funds would lead to an economic boom when a lot of the jobs during that time would’ve been for the war effort. There was definitely a drop in unemployment but the economic boom came after the war ended. So we traded unemployment for debt, right? Literal fact: the national debt went from  49 billion at the start of the war to ~260billion at the end. 

In 1946 congress removed the excessive profit tax, cut corporate tax rates, and cut top income tax rates. Those measures surely can’t go unnoticed or overlooked. 

[ilovewomen]

58 minutes ago, JoDoe27 said:

 I was just saying if I’m expected to go back out there for the sake of the economy at the behest of those opting to stay home and safe then they too should just come on out and join the fun. “Many will die” feels a lot different when It’s a possibility you and your loved ones might be part of those figures. 
 

I am past retirement age by a few years, very susceptible to pneumonia and the flu, bottom half of my right lung is not usuable.  Based on everything that we have heard, If I get the virus, I am going to be very, very sick.  But I'm not worried about it and I'm not going to hide. I work because I choose to work.  I'm going to be out there helping however i can to keep our economy running and supporting our first responders who are at the front lines...putting their life on the line to take care of the sick and elderly and helping everyone.

I am considered essential and I am working everyday.  So I am "joining the fun" as it has been stated.  So when I say, we need to off our asses and get back to work as soon as possible to keep our economy going, I am right there walking the walk. 

Another 4.4 million have filed for unemployment in the past week bringing the total in the last 5 weeks to over 26 million people who have filed for unemploment.  The U.S. gained 24 million jobs between the "Great Recession" as it is being called and now.  That means all the jobs that were gained from 2010 have been lost...in 5 weeks. 

Economists are predicting that in 6 months, we will be at 35%+ unemployment.  A figure far bigger than during the Great Depression. We need to open up the economy and get back to work.

 

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, ilovewomen said:

I'm going to be out there helping however i can to keep our economy running and supporting our first responders who are at the front lines...putting their life on the line to take care of the sick and elderly and helping everyone.

 

Those people are literally telling people not to be out there. The people you are purporting to support are saying if you’d like to support them and their efforts to keep people alive then do the opposite of what you’re proposing. There’s a whole social media campaign by medical staff encouraging people to not be out if they can avoid it. 
 

And I’m trying to make it clear that I am strongly in favor of trying get the economy restarted and for people to be back at work. Even if for my own selfish reasons. I understand that need. I just want us to be smart about it.

If you got sick would you seek medical help or languish at home and hope you recovered?

Hopefully I get this edit in: In some strange way I do actually appreciate your take on walking the walk. 

Edited April 23, 2020 by JoDoe27

[JRWolfe]

20 hours ago, Bit Banger said:

Yes, protect those most at risk while letting others go on about their business.  The current lock down has allowed resources to be gathered for dealing with these issues

  Define who are those most at risk ? On todays local news,I watched reports that a 5 year old has died from coronavirus and that a 4 year old was diagnosed with it...so its not just the elderly that are most at risk for this deadly virus...we all are.  Wheat Ridge,CO recognizes this fact and has announced,that as of this Monday,a fine system will be put in force and that their police will enforce it. went onto Safeway today and they won't let anyone in without a mask. (the TOB lady that drove me deserves a big thanks for the ride,she knows who she is .and yes she was paid ).

The resources are still baffled by coronavirus, we still do not have a vaccine. Mt friends in the medical field tell me that they are pretty much guessing how to treat it.

Yes, I get the economic impact. My friends in Vegas are freaking out on how to pay their bills when the citys casinos and restaurants they worked at our closed. Porn production has closed down,feature dancers and house girls no longer have clubs to dance at. My business partner in California says that all the schedulied photo shoots have been canceled,not just the adult industry,but the music and mainstream industry too. Hollywood has put everything on hold.  Everyone has their economic nightmares to talk about. We can't have a funeral for my mom due to social distancing. 

Are we headed to a SECOND Great Depression...yes. Will we eventually recover from it. Yes,just as we did from the first one.

 

[Old_Timer]

5 hours ago, JoDoe27 said:

Those people are literally telling people not to be out there. The people you are purporting to support are saying if you’d like to support them and their efforts to keep people alive then do the opposite of what you’re proposing. There’s a whole social media campaign by medical staff encouraging people to not be out if they can avoid it. 
 

And I’m trying to make it clear that I am strongly in favor of trying get the economy restarted and for people to be back at work. Even if for my own selfish reasons. I understand that need. I just want us to be smart about it.

If you got sick would you seek medical help or languish at home and hope you recovered?

Hopefully I get this edit in: In some strange way I do actually appreciate your take on walking the walk. 

I don't blame you for being reticent. It is too soon. Too many new cases a day.

And if the return to work is not handled with finess, we'll see another wave of infection.

[Bit Banger]

59 minutes ago, JRWolfe said:

  Define who are those most at risk ?

It’s not those ‘at risk’ for contracting the disease, but those less likely to survive!  And they are the usual suspects, ie those with compromised immune systems - the elderly, the young, those with pulmonary conditions, etc.  My brother-in-law’s Dr told him that his diabetes was a greater risk than his heart condition.  How do we protect them? Isolation, social distancing,  vigilante hygiene.  Protecting them is as much about conserving the resources to keep them alive as keeping them alive.

I took a short trip today; 1st time out of the park in over a week.  Mask, gloves, avoid close (<6’) contact.

CVS drive thru: a prescription refill.  They seem to be doing OK.

What-a-Burger drive thru:  Cut their staff by perhaps 3/shift, but doing enough business to stay afloat.

Bank: closed, ATM transactions only.  That’s 5-10 folks out of work.

WalMart:  a ghost town.  I’ve seen more late night customers.  They also seemed to have extra staff on duty,  but robotic janitorial services.  I don’t think they had enough business to pay the light bill.  But WalMart’s got deep pockets & access to credit, unlike mom&pop’s corner store.  Their “public service” is also a good play for greater market share, if they can weather the storm.

Someone asked if I’d just stay home & tough it out if I got infected?  To tell you the truth - I don’t know?  I haven’t signed a DNR yet,  so I’d probably seek some help.  I do have restrictions in place on how long they may keep me on life support.

[sb1212]

1 hour ago, JRWolfe said:

  Define who are those most at risk ? On ,I watched reports that a 5 year old has died from coronavirus and that a 4 year old was diagnosed with it...so its not just the elderly that are most at risk for this deadly virus...we all are.  

 

Yes, the elderly ARE the most at risk, along with those with underlying health issues.  All factual data supports this. While it is tragic that s 5 yr old died, 5 yr olds are much less likely to contract and die from this than 70 yr olds. My points?  1. Don't take a statistical anomaly and generalize it across a whole population. We are not all at equal risk.  2. We have to take calculated/acceptable risks to get going, or else we will cease to have any resources to do anything.  What is an acceptable level of risk? Provide voluntary protection to the highest risk groups and get the rest of us back in circulation, with protection and guidelines. If we wait until there is no risk, there won't be anything to wait for. 

[Bit Banger]

1 hour ago, sb1212 said:

... If we wait until there is no risk, there won't be anything to wait for. 

If we wait for no risk, it will NEVER happen.  There is always risk with every breath you take.  If it’s not C19, will it be that car crossing the median or the fish bone in your craw.

Has the Santa Cruz study been repeated?  The one that predicted the infection rate is 85 times higher than folks thought because most people were asymptomatic.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Bit Banger

[Kaduk]

6 hours ago, Bit Banger said:

Has the Santa Cruz study been repeated?  The one that predicted the infection rate is 85 times higher than folks thought because most people were asymptomatic.

sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Charts-show-Bay-Area-crushing-the-curve-vs

"Bay Area leaders were first in the nation to take dramatic action aimed at curbing the spread of the coronavirus.Many thought it was going too far. But in the days and weeks following the shelter-in-place orders here, governors and mayors across the country followed the Bay Area and California’s lead."

[Bit Banger]

A friend forwarded me this different perspective on the situation:

"I was reading some posts for and against reopening the country. One was talking about being selfish and it got me to thinking.

There are those wanting to reopen yet they’re being classified as selfish. There are those that rely on all kinds of people to supply them while they cower in fear at home. Isn’t that being selfish too?

You expect your garbage to be picked up, you expect the grocery store to be open so you can get milk, you expect truck drivers to supply the stores, you expect farmers, meatpackers, fruit and vegetable pickers all to keep food in that grocery store.

You expect Amazon to still ship all the things you’re ordering while you sit at home shopping. You expect the delivery driver to leave it on your doorstep. You expect your phone to work, your power to stay on, and your mail to show up rain, sleet, or shine. And most important, you expect the doctors and nurses to be there if you need them although many of them across the country have been furloughed because their units and services have been shut down while the entire system focuses only on COVID19.

The whole premise of shelter in place is based on the arrogant idea that others must risk their health so you can protect yours. There is nothing virtuous about ignoring the largely invisible army required to allow people to shelter in place.

I know there are some of you that are screaming mad about what I just said but stop and really think about what is allowing you to stay safe in your home.

I truly believe that with some common sense on my part, I could easily go back to life as it was. I want to go to restaurants, I want to shop at the little store just up the road.

And yes, I could catch COVID-19. I could also catch the flu or a cold. I could get run over by a bus. I could get struck by lightning. We take risks everyday. 

If you choose to stay home, that is absolutely your choice. And please don’t start screaming at me about how I’ll just spread it. Why are you worried? You won’t get it because you’re staying in your home. Are you going to shelter in place every time a new strand of the flu happens?

Our economy can’t withstand much more of this. If our economy collapses, so will the rest of the world’s. If that happens, you will see the rise of tyrants.
I absolutely don’t want people to die...from COVID or anything else. I want people to live.

But sheltering in place is not living."

I totally agree with the last two sentences.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Bit Banger