• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Would you report this kind of violation of stay at home order?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
Hehehehe.... can you think of a reason ... another reason why that would be? NY would have been better off you think? Cause? Magic Unicorns?

If this is what the US is dealing with to the count of 60 million then holy fuck Moses....
I don't know. Maybe piss poor leadership by Cuomo that forced senior citizen's to be treated in nursing homes instead of hospitals? Maybe the fact that massive lock downs on most businesses, but leaving a select few he wants open to remain open funneled people to those locations over time that spread the virus? There are other policy decisions being made that are now in hindsight have been judged to not have been all that smart to have made.
 

abj13

Senior member
Jan 27, 2005
832
436
136
I said that areas with lesser lock down restrictions are doing better in every metric. The from Sweden to Georgia is a sweeping generalization of such areas. I never specifically was pointing to one place or another with that statement.
Not only does Sweden have a higher per 1m capital deaths than the US, Sweden has 7x the number of deaths compared to Finland and Norway, two countries with very similar demographics but contrast in their responses to the pandemic. Sweden is right up there with one of the top countries in Europe (Italy, France, UK, Spain) with the number of cases per 1m capita. Sweden has 2-3x the number of cases per capital compared to Finland and Norway.

For someone who doesn't know the name of the virus, you sure don't understand what's going on in other nations. Why someone would use Sweden as an example of how a nation is doing well, you sure are clueless.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,073
9,946
136
I said that areas with lesser lock down restrictions are doing better in every metric. The from Sweden to Georgia is a sweeping generalization of such areas. I never specifically was pointing to one place or another with that statement.
Sweden? You level of lying to support a point sounds like someone we know.

newplot.png
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
7,871
4,870
136
No, the first is one is the statement to effect. The second was just some examples and there are plenty more. Countries with less restrictions on whole are doing better than countries with more restrictions on whole. Same with cities, states, and any other area. If you want to nitpick on Sweden in my example, feel free.
Sweden is the tentpole example, though. Saying these countries are better "on the whole" when the supposed poster child is clearly not faring better is disingenuous. And then there's Brazil, which is dealing with a massive surge in cases and deaths because its leader, like you, pretends he doesn't need lockdowns.

For that matter, the states that lifted lockdown measures early have so far been accused of trying to manipulate stats to avoid admitting that they opened too soon.

On the flip side there's countries like Australia and New Zealand. Yes, geographic isolation helped, but they also put on their big person pants and implemented strict lockdowns they held to until it was actually safe to start loosening up.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,073
9,946
136
The once agreed fact by science distancing mitigates spread. South Korea had some of the most aggressive testing and restrictions has one of the lowest per capita death rates 2.4%

Some of our lying blowhards have claimed how well states like Georgia are doing better then more restrictive states. Georgia's per capita death rate is almost double that of California
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
14,352
4,625
136
I don't know. Maybe piss poor leadership by Cuomo that forced senior citizen's to be treated in nursing homes instead of hospitals? Maybe the fact that massive lock downs on most businesses, but leaving a select few he wants open to remain open funneled people to those locations over time that spread the virus? There are other policy decisions being made that are now in hindsight have been judged to not have been all that smart to have made.
I think you are thinking of Trump, not Cuomo.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
55,455
3,857
126
What's funny is HumblePIe has already stated he is avoiding human contact and using delivery services and curbside pickup for everything. So he doesn't support lockdowns but isn't personally putting himself at risk. He just wants the poors getting him his shit.
Isn't that why the poors exist...to serve their betters?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
23,470
1,411
136
I said that areas with lesser lock down restrictions are doing better in every metric. The from Sweden to Georgia is a sweeping generalization of such areas. I never specifically was pointing to one place or another with that statement.
No. You said, and I quote "That's funny because the countries, cities, and states with the least restrictive lock downs are the ones doing the best in every metric. From Sweden to Georgia."

I repeat. You said "are the ones doing the best in every metric."

You said "best", not better. And "in every metric". Big difference.

They are not doing the best in every metric. Period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv and ch33zw1z

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,073
9,946
136
No. You said, and I quote "That's funny because the countries, cities, and states with the least restrictive lock downs are the ones doing the best in every metric. From Sweden to Georgia."

I repeat. You said "are the ones doing the best in every metric."

You said "best", not better. And "in every metric". Big difference.

They are not doing the best in every metric. Period.
Depends on what you mean by best and every :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
The once agreed fact by science distancing mitigates spread. South Korea had some of the most aggressive testing and restrictions has one of the lowest per capita death rates 2.4%

Some of our lying blowhards have claimed how well states like Georgia are doing better then more restrictive states. Georgia's per capita death rate is almost double that of California
South Korea had very little lock down restrictions. They did have the most testing and aggressive testing, but little in the way of lock downs. Since they were able to test more people, they were able to track cases easier and faster. That allows them to lock down the actual sick people or those around them and not the population at large. South Korea would be one of the examples in my statement about countries not doing lockdowns of their entire economy, populace, and infrastructure doing extremely well in comparison to many countries that did lock down everything.
 
Last edited:

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
A lot of nursing homes are federally regulated as well as falling under state regulations
Point to a federal regulation that Trump or his administration made that forced nursing homes, or even incentivized with money, to take in known sick elderly people.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
30,933
9,717
146
South Korea had very little lock down restrictions. They did have the most testing and aggressive testing, but little lock downs. Since they were able to test more people, they were able to track cases easier and faster. That allow them to lock down the actual sick people or those around them and not the population at large. South Korea would be one of the examples in my statement about countries not doing lockdowns of their entire economy, populace, and infrastructure doing extremely well in comparison to many countries that did lock down everything.
well we didn't do either, cuz reezuns.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
well we didn't do either, cuz reezuns.
Oh, we have a vastly different political atmosphere here and an order of magnitude more people in this country. Most places in the US did strict, but arbitrary lockdowns leaving a few businesses up and running, and the rest can't be opened. In many countries with such restrictive lockdowns, the suicide rate is starting to spike massively. There is another metric not everyone is looking out for. How many will die that didn't get the virus, but instead are too poor to survive afterwards or take their own lives because of it. The Great Depression killed of a massive amount of people in the US at the time, and many experts see us tracking right to that. The Great Depression had at it worst a 25% unemployment rate. The Great Recession was 10%. Currently we are at 15% and only going up.

Had we implemented, and were capable of implementing, a South Korean like target response based on testing, I believe things would be vastly different here. Or if we did a complete and total shutdown and martial law like places in China that may have been a different out come as well at least for spread of the virus. Then again China, despite them constantly trying to cover it up, keeps seeing resurgence of the virus in different places even with their total lockdowns. Can't really trust China in this epidemic about anything they say about the virus or how it is affecting their country.
 
Last edited:
Dec 10, 2005
20,503
1,826
126
Point to a federal regulation that Trump or his administration made that forced nursing homes, or even incentivized with money, to take in known sick elderly people.
The Trump adminstration is not known for using its federal authority to crack down on known bad actors (ie, known poor infection control standards pre-COVID) in the nursing home business
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
The Trump adminstration is not known for using its federal authority to crack down on known bad actors (ie, known poor infection control standards pre-COVID) in the nursing home business
Can you point to me in the Constitution that states the executive branch has the legal authority to crack down on poor infection control standards of nursing homes an various states? Where does it layout how they can oversee all nursing home implementations and actions as well as allowing the executive branch to take actions when the nursing homes fail?

Answer: it doesn't because the executive branch doesn't have that power. It is up to the state level.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
30,933
9,717
146
Oh, we have a vastly different political atmosphere here and an order of magnitude more people in this country. Most places in the US did strict, but arbitrary lockdowns leaving a few businesses up and running, and the rest can't be opened. In many countries with such restrictive lockdowns, the suicide rate is starting to spike massively. There is another metric not everyone is looking out. How many will die that didn't get the virus, but instead are too poor to survive afterwards or take their own lives because of it. The Great Depression killed of a massive amount of people in the US at the time, and many experts see us tracking right to that. The Great Depression had at it worst a 25% unemployment rate. The Great Recession was 10%. Currently we are at 15% and only going up.

Had we implemented, and were capable of implementing, a South Korean like target response based on testing, I believe things would be vastly different here. Or if we did a complete and total shutdown and martial law like places in China that may have been a different out come as well at least for spread of the virus. Then again China, despite them constantly trying to cover it up, keeps seeing resurgence of the virus in different places even with their total lockdowns. Can't really trust China in this epidemic about anything they say about the virus or how it is affecting their country.
The "lockdown" in my state (MA) was much more strict than other states, but for the first month of it nobody took it seriously. Plus, many many people are considered essential, and almost everyone I know or am blood / married related to went to work as usual.

Sure, there's fall out from any choice. Mental health is important.

Yea, I trust China as much as I trust FL to report what's really happening, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Dec 10, 2005
20,503
1,826
126
Can you point to me in the Constitution that states the executive branch has the legal authority to crack down on poor infection control standards of nursing homes an various states? Where does it layout how they can oversee all nursing home implementations and actions as well as allowing the executive branch to take actions when the nursing homes fail?

Answer: it doesn't because the executive branch doesn't have that power. It is up to the state level.
They take Medicare, they are subject to federal regulations. I'm sure you would know that with your legal expertise
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

jmagg

Golden Member
Nov 21, 2001
1,606
167
106
Reporting would never cross my mind. Protecting yourself and your loved ones the best you can is about all you can do in this mess.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,271
232
106
They take Medicare, they are subject to federal regulations. I'm sure you would know that with your legal expertise
Just taking medicare means they are subject to regulations around medicare. Not in day to day business operations. The federal government has no legal authority to regulate that and never should. Scope of power for the federal government is narrowly defined by the Constitution for a reason.
 

pmv

Diamond Member
May 30, 2008
6,935
2,251
136
Not only does Sweden have a higher per 1m capital deaths than the US, Sweden has 7x the number of deaths compared to Finland and Norway, two countries with very similar demographics but contrast in their responses to the pandemic. Sweden is right up there with one of the top countries in Europe (Italy, France, UK, Spain) with the number of cases per 1m capita. Sweden has 2-3x the number of cases per capital compared to Finland and Norway.

For someone who doesn't know the name of the virus, you sure don't understand what's going on in other nations. Why someone would use Sweden as an example of how a nation is doing well, you sure are clueless.

Yes - Sweden has been moving rapidly up the table in deaths-per-capita. It won't be long before it overtakes France.

Sweden hasn't been doing well at all at keeping its elderly and sick alive, and I think it's not coincidental that despite being a supposed 'leftist' social-democracy, it's a country that spent most of the last century in love with the concept of eugenics.

The three countries that have been performing noticeably badly on that metric are the US, the UK, and Sweden (UK just overtook Italy). I suspect they ('we') will end up as the top three on the international table of deaths per capita.

I don't know what the Swedes were thinking, though I suspect it might be down to some quirky ideas of their chief epidemiologist.

Edit - oh, also so much for their hope that Stockholm would be approaching 'herd immunity' by now. Testing shows currently only 7% of the city's population have antibodies.
 
Last edited:

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,492
2,994
126
The Great Depression had at it worst a 25% unemployment rate. The Great Recession was 10%. Currently we are at 15% and only going up.
The Great Depression's worst days had 15 million unemployed. Our population has risen 270% since 1930. That means 40 million today. We stood at 39 last week., based on this week's report. Great Depression? We are already there in terms of economic impact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ASK THE COMMUNITY