Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That door was somehow inspired by a passage in Steppenwolf, which book I
never made it through.
Of course not. But about 1/4 of the population will, and about all we
can do, at huge expense, is change when that happens.
On 4/26/2020 2:05 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
The "let 'er rip" crowd demands the poor in the service industries get
out there and die for them at lil protest gatherings for 20 minutes and
then runs back home and hides and orders bougie take-out from GrubHub
and types opinions into the computer like real bad-asses.
On 2020-04-26 16:17, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
We took a walk yesterday in the old Bernal Cut, which is now San Jose
avenue. It's surprising how many of the overpaid downtown apartment
dwelling lumbersexual brogrammers never get away from the dense,
concrete, expensive parts of town.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/82knlnruobhkkbo/AAAcl2Ten9zw6tA3G0IhEaPVa?dl=0
That door was somehow inspired by a passage in Steppenwolf, which book
I never made it through.
Neither did I.
I really liked "Magister Ludi" though.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 14:54:12 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 4/26/2020 2:05 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
The "let 'er rip" crowd demands the poor in the service industries get
out there and die for them at lil protest gatherings for 20 minutes and
then runs back home and hides and orders bougie take-out from GrubHub
and types opinions into the computer like real bad-asses.
Cowardice is a conservative value
Backwards. My liberal/progressive friends are terrified to leave home.
They won't even step inside our front door for free lemons; I leave a
baggie outside for them to pick up. My rare conservative pals are
going to work and not wearing masks. The huge range of fear and
not-fear is impressive.
Again, you fantasize people who don't actually exist, so you can mock
them. You seem to do that a lot.
Our occasional housekeeper lady isn't coming in now, but we are paying
her anyhow. How's that for conservative greed?
This one lemon is all it will take for tonight's lemon pie.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lltg2xxmv38f903/Lemon_Calc.jpg?raw=1
This one, still on the tree, is about the size and shape of a small
pumpkin.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1f5ux77p6o12w7k/Lemon-pumpkin.jpg?raw=1
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 18:43:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
The virus has certainly taken on near-mythological properties that are a
bit much for even this "leftist" to swallow.
Yep, along with an impressive number of scientific publications on the
topic:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=covid+19
163,000 hits in the last 100 days or so.
"subtle internal organ damage" happens all the time from many causes and
is repaired. Even more serious impact on internal organs occurs from
e.g. starvation! Holocaust survivors eating starvation-rations for
months and years isn't good for the internal organs either but as far as
it's been studied long-term mortality among survivors doesn't appear
particularly worse than the general population:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2720067
Thanks. That article will be handy.
I would agree that the long term effects of a starvation diet did not
produce Holocaust survivors that would drop dead randomly from "subtle
internal organ damage". Both my parents and my step mother were
survivors of various camps in Poland. My father died at age 86, my
mother at 53, and my step mother at 80. Various relatives mostly made
it into their 80's, with a few exceptions dying much earlier.
When I lived in Smog Angeles, my parents (and I) were members of what
was then called "The 1939 Club". It's now called "The 1939 Society".
https://www.the1939society.org
and was at the time composed mostly of Polish Holocaust survivors.
Through this organization, I met many other Holocaust survivors. They
are now long dead, but as I recall, most were quite old (70's and
80's) when they died. The few exceptions that died earlier, such as
my mother, had something in common. All died from various
cardiovascular problems. What happened was they mostly came from the
Krakow or Katowice area of southern Poland. Prior to 1939, the lower
classes didn't travel much and tended to live in ghettos. The result
was substantial inbreeding, which tended to bring out the worst in
hereditary maladies. In my case and my extended family, it was heart
and circulatory problems. Without those problems, I'm sure those that
died early would have lived as long as the others.
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 07:55:23 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
Just because someone self-reports their virus infection was asymptomatic doesn't mean it actually was. The majority don't have a clue about the kinds of more subtle damage that can occur. They could have suffered internal organ damage that will develop into serious chronic illness later in time, maybe decades. It is more likely than not that many of the millions people who have been "exposed" are damaged in some way.
Then this idea of hypersensitivity and disease enhancement, observed repeatedly with corona virus infection over decades of study, could and likely does explain the so-called higher mortality "second wave" fiasco expected in fall 2020/ winter 2021.
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple
peaks. But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go
out and get infected.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
Compared to what? What do you think will be the outcome if we do nothing? Once you have that, then we can consider approaches that may be better.
So what is your expectation if we do nothing and how did you come to the result?
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
The virus has certainly taken on near-mythological properties that are a
bit much for even this "leftist" to swallow.
"subtle internal organ damage" happens all the time from many causes and
is repaired. Even more serious impact on internal organs occurs from
e.g. starvation! Holocaust survivors eating starvation-rations for
months and years isn't good for the internal organs either but as far as
it's been studied long-term mortality among survivors doesn't appear
particularly worse than the general population:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2720067
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just
prolong the chaos? Or even cost lives?
Costs lives. It doesn't save people from dying, only changes the
date. Plus it adds lots of deaths from previously preventable
causes.
Cheers,
James Arthur
dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote in
news:ba5b933a-8f72-43f9-a8e3-b093f0b01158@googlegroups.com:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4,
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just
prolong the chaos? Or even cost lives?
Costs lives. It doesn't save people from dying, only changes the
date. Plus it adds lots of deaths from previously preventable
causes.
Cheers,
James Arthur
Well if that is the case then we should shut everything including the
food infrastructure and whomever survives that gets what's left.
You Dr.Phil mentality idiots are fucked in the head.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 18:05:51 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
cd@not4mail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks..
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
Yes, especially the poorest places where people were already
struggling to keep themselves and their kids alive.
Assuming that this is not just another seasonal cold, voluntary
distancing and sanitation would be effective; enough people are
terrified for that to mostly work.
Shutting down the world economy for
some indefinite time is doing a great deal of harm that will outlast
this epidemic. This is not about "profit", it's about survival.
Some places will extend the lockdown, some will go back to work soon, some hav never locked down. Maybe some will lock down until there is a vaccine,
in a year or two or never. We'll have data one day.
Prediction: this will increase migration from the big urban centers,
especially US northeast, to lower density states. This will increase
economic inequality.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 14:58:18 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 4/26/2020 2:51 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 11:28:03 -0700, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 18:05:51 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
cd@not4mail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
Yes, especially the poorest places where people were already
struggling to keep themselves and their kids alive.
Assuming that this is not just another seasonal cold, voluntary
distancing and sanitation would be effective; enough people are
terrified for that to mostly work. Shutting down the world economy for
some indefinite time is doing a great deal of harm that will outlast
this epidemic. This is not about "profit", it's about survival.
Again, I have seen no coherent plan for an exit strategy. Some places
will extend the lockdown, some will go back to work soon, some have
never locked down. Maybe some will lock down until there is a vaccine,
in a year or two or never. We'll have data one day.
Prediction: this will increase migration from the big urban centers,
especially US northeast, to lower density states. This will increase
economic inequality.
Darn, I thought I had made an original observation.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/people-were-leaving-new-york-city-before-the-coronavirus-now-what-11587916800
https://news.trust.org/item/20200426145150-ho68p
Ya, people sometimes leave the city with one of the highest
costs-of-living on the planet, go figure. You don't have to move to
Nebraska to live better on a smaller budget, though.
I wonder why companies keep packing offices and employees into places
where a tiny 1br apartment costs 3K a month, and taxes and hassle are
high. Maybe over-funded startups figure that's where the glitz is.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 14:54:12 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 4/26/2020 2:05 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
The "let 'er rip" crowd demands the poor in the service industries get
out there and die for them at lil protest gatherings for 20 minutes and
then runs back home and hides and orders bougie take-out from GrubHub
and types opinions into the computer like real bad-asses.
Cowardice is a conservative value
Backwards. My liberal/progressive friends are terrified to leave home.
They won't even step inside our front door for free lemons; I leave a
baggie outside for them to pick up. My rare conservative pals are
going to work and not wearing masks. The huge range of fear and
not-fear is impressive.
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:26:12 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 07:55:23 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
Just because someone self-reports their virus infection was asymptomatic doesn't mean it actually was. The majority don't have a clue about the kinds of more subtle damage that can occur. They could have suffered internal organ damage that will develop into serious chronic illness later in time, maybe decades. It is more likely than not that many of the millions people who have been "exposed" are damaged in some way.
Then this idea of hypersensitivity and disease enhancement, observed repeatedly with corona virus infection over decades of study, could and likely does explain the so-called higher mortality "second wave" fiasco expected in fall 2020/ winter 2021.
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple
peaks. But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go
out and get infected.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
Compared to what? What do you think will be the outcome if we do nothing? Once you have that, then we can consider approaches that may be better..
So what is your expectation if we do nothing and how did you come to the result?
--
The choice is not between doing nothing and doing a lockdown. The choice is between doing everything possible except having a lockdown and doing a lockdown as well as everything else. Having a lockdown means about 30 million people will still be working and 300 million will be unemployed.
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:26:12 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 07:55:23 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
Just because someone self-reports their virus infection was asymptomatic doesn't mean it actually was. The majority don't have a clue about the kinds of more subtle damage that can occur. They could have suffered internal organ damage that will develop into serious chronic illness later in time, maybe decades. It is more likely than not that many of the millions people who have been "exposed" are damaged in some way.
Then this idea of hypersensitivity and disease enhancement, observed repeatedly with corona virus infection over decades of study, could and likely does explain the so-called higher mortality "second wave" fiasco expected in fall 2020/ winter 2021.
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple
peaks. But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go
out and get infected.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
Compared to what? What do you think will be the outcome if we do nothing? Once you have that, then we can consider approaches that may be better.
So what is your expectation if we do nothing and how did you come to the result?
--
The choice is not between doing nothing and doing a lockdown. The
choice is between doing everything possible except having a lockdown
and doing a lockdown as well as everything else. Having a lockdown
means about 30 million people will still be working and 300 million
will be unemployed.
Cowardice is a Liberal value
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 2:54:14 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 4/26/2020 2:05 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 10:01:30 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
What is the exit strategy for the economic lockdown?
Varies from country to country. The important thing is to NOT do anything
the WHO is demanding. Whatever they may or may not know about health,
their standpoint is indefensible economically.
A common, and probably silly, prediction is that there will be
oscillatory cycles of lockdown relief and re-infection, multiple peaks.
But however we relax lockdown, it will free some people to go out and
get infected.
It will keep frontline healthcare workers almost constantly at the point
of exhaustion (and beyond) for an indefinite period.
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
They should have let the damn thing rip IMO. Yes, many of us would die
(and I'm at in an elevated risk group myself) but the dragged-out way
this is being handled is going to have damaging and even ruinous economic
consequences for a huge proportion of people all around the world.
The "let 'er rip" crowd demands the poor in the service industries get
out there and die for them at lil protest gatherings for 20 minutes and
then runs back home and hides and orders bougie take-out from GrubHub
and types opinions into the computer like real bad-asses.
Cowardice is a Liberal value
On Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
My big question: did/does lockdown net save lives? Or just prolong the
chaos? Or even cost lives?
Costs lives. It doesn't save people from dying, only changes the date.
Plus it adds lots of deaths from previously preventable causes.
Cheers,
James Arthur