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.
I really think there is a certain glee that some people get from
contemplating other peoples' death.
On 4/26/2020 3:34 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
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.
You can get a second-floor studio apt on this street in downtown
Providence for under 1k/month, look at all this shocking urban decay.
Why you might be jumped by a vegan at any time!
https://architecturehereandthere.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/dscn8329.jpg
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 00:02:36 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
cd@not4mail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 12:56:23 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
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.
I reckon at some stage we'll all be exposed to it as the economic
imperative will inevitably require. So best we build up a herd immunity.
Let the young people go out and spread it if they're happy to take the
risk. The quicker we reach that critical level for herd immunity, the
sooner we can all go back to - what will be anything but - normal.
Yes. Protect those at risk. Try to treat people who get it. Get it
over.
In a way, a healthy young person who hides, wears a mask, avoids
contact with others, is being selfish. Wanting someone else to take
the small risk for herd immunity.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 12:56:23 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
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.
I reckon at some stage we'll all be exposed to it as the economic
imperative will inevitably require. So best we build up a herd immunity.
Let the young people go out and spread it if they're happy to take the
risk. The quicker we reach that critical level for herd immunity, the
sooner we can all go back to - what will be anything but - normal.
Who does the hair of people who die of COVID-19???
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:46:15 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
cd@not4mail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 21:10:15 -0700, jlarkin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:44:51 -0700 (PDT), Michael Terrell
terrell.michael.a@gmail.com> wrote:
Cowardice is a Liberal value
I think so. Leftists want to be insured and protected.
And they'd give up any and all of the precious rights they enjoy in
exchange for some illusory "security" promised them by their lords and
masters in the DP. Pathetic!
The essence of leftism, really the definition, is that we benefit from
increased collective action and public authority.
The essence of conservative/libertarian thought is "leave me alone and
I'll take care of myself."
If you graph, over history, human misery vs central control, it's a
strong upward slope.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 22:44:01 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 4/26/2020 10:16 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
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.
James Arthur is the definition of "arrogant ass."
I've known him for decades. He's nice, smart, thoughtful, a good
engineer, and has a great singing voice.
He has some spread-spectrum
patents. But he skis in short pants, which I think is scandalous.
Who wants to see all those bony legs when you're concentrating on your
turns?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bgu1x1ajlk3rpit/July_4_Bikini.jpg?raw=1
On 2020-04-27, dcaster@krl.org <dcaster@krl.org> wrote:
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.
90% (ish) sitting idle seems quite high, where did this estimate come
from?
--
Jasen.
On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 12:02:51 AM UTC-4, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2020-04-27, dcaster@krl.org <dcaster@krl.org> wrote:
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.
90% (ish) sitting idle seems quite high, where did this estimate come
from?
--
Jasen.
The numbers are just a SWAG. There are a lot that are not employed, but who are not idle. Just born to about 20 years old are learning. And a bunch starting at about 60 years old are retired.
Dan
It was absolutely disgusting what happened to the Jews in
Poland and I am mystified as to why the hell all the hatred.
The population of Jews there was small, the communities were small,
the people were mostly working class trades people. But for some
reason both the Nazis and the Poles wanted them all dead and gone.
I'm sure you've seen this movie:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_from_Sobibor
Those f'ing Russian scum mislead the prisoners with a sh_t escape
plan, just using the prisoners as fodder to provide cover for
themselves from the tower machine guns. Then they abandoned their
group of 60 prisoners in the forest, misleading them again,
when they knew the smallest group was better able to avoid
detection, move faster, and leave less of a trace. The escapees
had not only the Germans after them but also the Polish vigilantes,
only too happen to hunt them down and turn them over to the Germans.
As far as I could find out, the movie was factually accurate in
the most important details.