Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
First of all I loath to take anything from Fox news at face value since they have proven to have no issue with lying straight to my face and I feel this is no different. For example they are making the assumption that the disease will slow down or even die off in the summer heat when that is not supported by facts. It might, but that is more us trying to compare Covid19 to the seasonal flu which it is not and its very disingenuous of Tucker to push this narrative to undermine the actual damage and threat of Covid19.Here you can see the current projection of Covid19 which is under the assumption that current measures will continue rather than open up the country.covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-americaAs you can see there is a very large uncertainty space there because we simply dont have enough information about the properties of the disease and how many people is actually infected in the first place because of inadequate testing. What I think Tucker has done is simply to take the highest estimate he could find and claim that is the one scientists first projected and then compare it to a "lesser evil" to make it look better. Typical behavior of Fox really to misrepresent facts.As for what would happen if you prematurely opened up the country after "flattening the curve" we actually have historical examples of that when certain, shall we say "optimistic" countries attempted this. It usually ended with either the outbreak significantly extending for possibly months or even went back into logarithmic growth in spread.
There is also a very good argument to be made that even if you try to focus on the economy instead of public health you still end up damaging the economy severely anyways. Factors such as losing large numbers of people both to sickness leave or death would make a similar effect to them just staying home in the first place and the social unrest of having society deal with both the death of their countrymen and people they know without the government or their employers doing anything again risks the economy. Workers refusing to work such as what happened with fast food workers recently is just one example.From where I stand you more or less only have two choices. Sacrifice both the health of your people and the economy by trying to save the economy or focus on the health with the possibility that getting it over with sooner might do less damage to the economy than the alternative.
@Soteris On your basic point, we would agree except that the economy does not have a on/off switch. Not being able to say when you can open up the economy again effectively means it will remain shut. This well past the point that you say, "Okay, everybody back to work."You are proffering the fallacy of the false alternative. The hospitality industry will be especially hard hit and the longer restraurants, bars and the like cannot be given a rock solid date, the more likely it is that they will not be there to re-hire. (Just as an aside, the average cash on hand of a non-franchise restaurant is about 90 days.)The irony further being that the longer this drags out, the more advantages that go to large businesses and corporations. You are literally gutting the medium and small sized businesses and the jobs that they provide. (The majority of jobs come from such businesses.)Throw in the unfavorable demographics that make the swelling national debt increasingly unmanageable and the unbacked dollars that the Fed and Congress are throwing into the economy. You are setting up for one big mess - and you still won't likely cap the health problem. Keep in mind that the 1918-1919 pandemic came in three waves and it is likely that the current improvement is as much, if not more, due to warmer weather as to social distancing."CONT.
This being my central point. Not ever problem has a solution. Some are just difficulties that must be managed as best they can be. So you either adopt policies that reflect that reality and balance costs and benefits or you take an approach that is closest to Ahab chasing his whale - and pay an analogous price. The "cross your fingers and hope it works" approach is not good policy. It is wishful thinking masquerading as analysis. The variables COULD change, for better or for worse - and already have. You are just left making an arbitrary judgment about when that MIGHT stop.P. S. As for Mr. Carlson, I am not a huge fan. However, in fairness, he is citing the very data that has guided both the Federal and state governments. That seems a not unreasonable standard regardless of the source.
Actually there is very little reason why the economy could not have an "on/off" switch. If everyone was to sleep an extra day without noticing not much would change for the economy. A week and things would be impacted such as perishable goods. The main problem here is not switching off the economy, that would be simpler but to only switch off parts of the economy. A good example is shutting down a business but still force it to keep paying for its rented properties and such thing. Basically removing income but maintaining expenses.This is where the government really comes in. The country itself can shoulder massive economic burdens and is not limited to the short sighted self interest of businesses themselves that are only really concerned about personal benefits by their very design.As you have implied yourself, if the large businesses can benefit from this situation they would even if it harms the country with the diminishing of small and medium businesses. The only one that can both make a decision on behalf of the country as a whole as well as have the ability to literally shoulder the economy for a time is the state itself.It would be ridiculously complicated and expensive but the state could very well make its own "on/off" button for the economy.
I am not a particularly big supporter of this though. There may very well be certain industries that needs to be protected to a certain extent for national interests. Arms manufacturers maybe or companies that provides important products for national security such as oil and electricity.Aside from that I believe that companies should be allowed to fail. Capitalism and all that. There are so much going around that individuals should have savings in case of long term hardships but that also applies to companies and this is why.This is especially true for the largest corporations who often use money they do not yet have with the expectation that they will get that money in the next quarter based on previous experience. This is gambling and they need to shoulder their own risk.
Lastly there is no sign that Covid-19 will respond to the warm weather. The pandemic you mentioned even had an increase during the summer just as an example however again, that was a flu type of disease and Sars-cov-2 is a Coronavirus. They are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. Even a coronavirus and another coronavirus can be completely different much less a coronavirus and a whole other family of viruses.Same goes for what will happen afterwards since we do not know how quickly this virus mutates into new strains that could cause more waves but most experts agree that this is probably not going to be fully over until we develop a vaccine.
@Soteris Sort reply to a long reply - They are actually handing out approximately $1000 to every citizen who paid taxes last year. Further, small businesses are eligible for grants if they retain all their employees. (That system is having some difficulty getting off the ground but they are working the bugs out now.) This counting the oceans of money being poured out through the Fed.However, that will not likely do the trick. Small businesses typically have 90 days cash on hand and if they retain staff but the economy does not resume - as likely it will not - then small and medium business will end up right back where it was. Unless of course you wish to make business wards of the state - read taxpayer - forever more.CONT.
The problem there being that the national debt is skyrocketing at a time when the nation's demographics are such that the population is aging and therefore the workforce - and thus the number of taxpayers - is declining relative to population. Thus all you are doing is speeding up the day when the country reaches the point of insolvency - with all that will entail for future generations in terms of their education and employment prospects.Oh, and by the way, my point was not that large business will prosper, but merely that as small and medium sized businesses fall, the larger businesses, with greater capacity, will survive. Prospering only in the relative sense that they will endure as the smaller businesses were winnowed out.As far as an on/off switch, you are kidding yourself. Just one example. Already small restaurants are expecting that it will be hard to entice customers to return. Moreover, that people will want to sit in close proximity the way that they used to. Fewer tables mean few customers. Fewer customers means less revenue. Less revenue means fewer employees and thus more unemployed and thus less demand throughout the economy.You speak with the confidence of the social engineer. Sadly, society is not a tinkertoy that can be pulled apart and reassembled at will. Not to mention that the law of unintended consequences always pertains. As to there being no evidence that the virus does not respond to weather conditions, that is not suggested by the more limited spread of the virus in warmer climates. Compare Singapore to New York for example. CONT.
Typically airborne viruses are depressed by warmer climate and the heavier and more humid air weighs down and disperses the virus. While, you are right, that this is not definitive as yet, there is no reason to discount it as a factor. Bottom line, you are still in the same place. A prolonged lockdown is not sustainable on several levels. The economic being one - and the knock on effects of that have their own toll. Bottom line, there are just some hard truths that a presumably grown-up nation needs to grapple with. Your suggestion sounds easy, but it is merely ephemeral.
Both economic effects and effects from the virus are terrible.
@Wad595 Can't deny that. The point is that you need a policy that tries to balance the mitigation of the effects of both. Focus only one one and you are bound to get a lot worse from the other - to oversimplify just a bit.Anyhow, apologies to both you and @Soteris. I do owe this a more detailed response to both you and him, but it is Easter weekend and I have three kids and so I am doing this on the fly. If I skipped over any point, apologies in advance. I am basically out of pocket - except for a bit tomorrow morning - for the rest of today, and all of tomorrow and most of Monday. Again, sincere apologies if I skipped over any of your points. Gotta admit that I am doing this on the fly.
I’m sure the world would live to hear it since no one seems to have any ideas at the moment. We are literally being held hostage by this virus.
Before we continue I am really not sure why you are so caught up on the idea that sars-cov-2 is climate dependent. You say its spreading more in colder climates but honestly I dont think that has anything to do with it. If you compare the rate of spread between countries around the world they follow more or less the same pattern even in warmer climates. The fact that you see more in for example Europe has more to do with them being exposed to it earlier which could easily be explained with how much they travel, especially to and from China.You can compare countries here if you want:https://www.coronaviruschart.com/While the information is hardly ideal the incline of the curve is about the same for every country that has not had exceptional luck or exceptional success in combating the disease. We have no reason to believe it is indeed a factor at this point.
@Soteris Sorry, as this is Easter and I have small children, I have to go. It has been interesting and you are a refreshingly pleasant and civil arguing partner. If I had more time I would keep it up. However, girlfriend and three little Munchkins trump debate. You understand.As far as the climate, just last night in an interview - I think on Fox - a doctor from the CDC confirmed that there was a climate dimension to this disease. (I think it was on Jesse Watters, but I don't recall. I meant to write it down, but girlfriend and I were making and hiding Easter baskets and presents.)Anyhow, the government is operating on that premise and hence the fear of a recurrence in the fall. Well, we can get into this again. Since coronavirus questions on this site just won't go away anytime soon, I am sure that we will run into each other again. All the best.
I believe there is not yet a definitive answer to how SARS-COV2 will behave in warmer climates. However, many respiratory viruses are slowed down by warmer weather.
@Wad595 That is not helpful at all. I may as well counter by saying "Many respiratory viruses spreads faster in warmer weather" because that is just as true.
@Soteris yes that is also a valid point. I think you are right in that opening up the country after “flattening the curve” would be disastrous. However, I believe @nightdrot also has a point in that there is a balance to be struck with the effects from the economic fallout. As the president himself said, the country was not made to be shut down for a long time. I would think that a sensible compromise would be to see which measures can be relaxed once the “peak” has passed and places like New York are in a situation where it’s hospitals can cope with the large influx of patients.
So true, but many people don't believe he REALLY has NPD, but think it's just Trump haters. He's really a sick man, mentally.
@loveslongnails I know. The idea that its just hate is heavily pushed. Any reasons given are dismissed as biased by the media. To the die hard 30% The nationalists, gun fanatics and dedicated card carrying GOP for lifers, every one else is wrong and nothing said will ever be right if they did not say it first.
Exactly, which are prime examples of narcissistic behavior. I understand how people can get turned off by perceived haters, and totally block your message out. But the 30% are not capable of discerning truth from fiction, or judging a person's character based on their actions. The final straw is a little thing called "facts"... evidence. There NEVER is, nor can there BE, any real "evidence" against their guy. It's all completely made up or fabricated by the haters. It doesn't matter if it's on video, or recorded, or tweeted... all facts can be disregarded as fake news, even the recorded ones. When things bring down to this point, sane people become so frustrated with the stupids that we don't know what to do. It's just beyond our comprehension as to how there can be so much "willful ignorance". The last time there was so much enmity was the Nixon era, and before that, Wilson. But this bar is the lowest, most vile since Andrew Jackson, and he was impeached too !!
@loveslongnailsslongnails I agree. But I have no idea what to do. Perhaps the pandemic will sort this for us. But, I doubt it.
You can't do anything about the "dirty 30" - they will always be either stupid or willfully ignorant, the latter being much worse. We CAN control ourselves, and do all we can to overthrow the despot, no matter who replaces him, at this point. Though it's difficult to imagine "worse", Pence would be, so he must be voted out.
The one who die first will be the ones who don’t support him in the upcoming election. I think that might include you, @abc3643.
Trump said he has not decided if it should be up to states. He just said it right now--and said it before.
Regardless, Trump does not have executive authority to order a national lockdown.
And he doesn’t have authority to lift state and municipal stay at home mandates. That’s up to state and local authorities who imposed them.
Yes, but people think he does. And if he says it, people will start going out and not following guidelines. He just needs to shut up.
60,000, "assuming full social distancing through May 2020". And more if the virus takes hold again for a second wave.covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
The US is not the "number 1 country in the world"
Ignorance. And poor education.
@differentpixel well at least it does obviously not need a big iducation to see that this Trump guy is a massive liar XD so yeah i don't get how people seriously consider voting that turd again.
No he is not. He is on right now and just said he wants to open fast.
So you are ok to have more Americans die too. I see. I would hate for you to lose your older family members but it would be possible.
Yes he wanted to open up fast but no orders do not understand the difference between wanting something and ordering something by law? He thinking more than one step ahead I know this is hard for liberal. The economic damage from this is already far worse than the virus would have ever been it really only kills the old and weak. And there is no economic negative to these people dying but there's actually many positives.The fact is you really don't know what's going on and you're just very emotional
It also affects how many Americans will die.
Nothing bad about reducing the surplus population
yes, maybe better to NOT repair capitalism
@msc545 To put this in perspective, if you make a tower and take off the floor 0, what do you think will happen? To take off capitalism it'd need decades and a vast majority of American will be agains't that
Hate to interrupt you sucking Trump's teeny dick but George Soros has fuck all to do with anything- but to Trumpees he's behind everything. Continue.
@coffeewithcream Soros has a lot to do with what's going on. You're probably getting a check from him to.
Oh, yes. Every person who disagrees with Trumpees gets a cheque cut by Soros, free MacDonalds burgers and every fifth coffee free at Tim Hortons. Good ol' Soros. He's funded everything you disagree with from global warming to YouTube commercials to Cherry Cola.
@coffeewithcream Well, there's honestly nothing wrong with cherry cola. But you can lift about any rock and find Soros hiding under it or some other globalist scum bag.
That makes no sense. He wants Americans to die? That is human?
He never implied this. It's possible that he meant for the opposite to happen and that it backfired.
Then he should just shut up then. Americans would be better off.
No, he shouldn't. He's the president of the United States. He must speak. The US citizens deserve to know what he has to say.
No, we don't.
If you don't like your leaders, you're always free to leave the country.
We are also free to remove them.
The majority must agree on that. Not just you. So take it or leave it.
Watch what happens in November. He's toast.
True. He was elected by his lies by mistake. He will not get elected again. America deserves so much better than a psycho.
Ya but he will get elected back
@Asker- Trump got elected by mistake? Lol
lol he BETTER not get elected again
He will get re elected I am 💯 sure