Discussion in 'The PatsFans.com Pub' started by Ian, Mar 27, 2020.
I saw him on Fox saying that nonsense with all the honesty of an insurance salesman. I'm 70 and willing to sacrifice myself for my grandkids.
I wonder if now that kids have died, if he's willing to throw one of his grandkids in there with him.
He's not the most humane person on the planet, but he's hardly incompetent. But that's fine. Like I said in my first post, you're not going to be able to be objective about anything having to do with Trump. This is a white flag. Your opinion is noted.
The "Drain the Swamp" thing needs to be spotlighted in the next election. We need to define it, because the two parties mean different things. The Dems mean get rid of the lobbyists and big money contributions in politics. The Repubs mean get rid of career government workers who have and exercise viewpoints that are counter to the Administration.
As it relates to fighting a pandemic, on one side we've got career government workers in public health, and on the other side we've got states' rights and the views of individuals who challenge the line coming out of the public health organizations.
Oh, what he said was disgraceful. No doubt. But I'm not taking that article seriously.
You're 70!? You old ****. You're going to die if you get the Rona Boi.
OK, here's a Facebook post from a Swede, an economist called Erik Angner:
People seem to have a lot of questions about the Swedish approach to the corona virus. Here's some background, from my point of view, for those interested.
Sweden is much more of an epistocracy than other comparable countries. By law and by tradition, ministers can't tell the various government agencies what to do. This means that many of the day-to-day decisions relating to government business are made by staff hired on the basis of domain-relevant expertise, rather than political connections.
In the case of corona strategy, this means that many of the day-to-day decisions are made by staff epidemiologists at the Folkhälsomyndigheten (FHM) -- the equivalent of the CDC. I see lots of criticisms to the effect that Tegnell, the chief FHM epidemiologist, has abrogated power, pretends to be king, or the like, and that the prime minister has gone AWOL, etc. These criticisms reflect a misunderstanding of Sweden's constitutional framework: these people are all doing their jobs. I also see a bunch of criticisms to the effect that Sweden is going against the recommendations of the experts. This is plainly false: experts call the shots here. (It would be more correct to say that experts disagree.)
The central argument from Tegnell and his colleagues (as I understand if from having watched a number of press conferences) is that harsher measures would be ineffective from a public-health standpoint. They cite experiences from previous outbreaks and scientific literature in support of the position that border closures, school closings, etc., would do no real good at this stage of the outbreak. They're not trying to prevent harms to the economy by sacrificing public health, like some people seem to think. That sort of trade-off would be outside of their bailiwick.
I don't know what strategy is the correct one at this stage. (Neither do you.) But so far there's little evidence that Swedish outcomes are particularly bad. On the Financial Times tracker (Fig. 1), Sweden is not doing particularly well but not particularly badly either. Moreover, there is little evidence here that the countries that went into complete lockdown (like France) see their curves bend to the right after the lockdown. France and Spain are both doing terribly after lockdowns; Japan is doing fantastically well without draconian measures.
You can make more specific comparisons too. Denmark is interesting because politicians started closing borders, etc., quite early – against the objections of their public health officials. And as you can tell from the graph below, Swedish and Danish trajectories are effectively non-distinguishable (Fig. 2).
Another encouraging statistic is that the number of people admitted to the ICU with covid-19 has been trending down for a week (Fig. 3).
From the point of view of behavioral economics, it is well known that sanctions of various kinds – bans, mandates, incentives – can backfire. People here know it. Every so often somebody proposes that bike helmets should be mandatory. But that proposal has always been shot down on the basis that a law would backfire. Note that this does not deny that wearing a bike helmet is a good thing in an accident -- it's just recognizing that there are better ways to get people to wear helmets than to mandate them. Same thing for harsher measures to effect physical distancing. Everybody recognizes that physical distancing is a good thing; the disagreement concerns how to get people to exhibit the behavior.
Note that one argument against harsher measures sooner is that they merely postpone the outbreak. So you can't assess these strategies until some time after the measures are lifted.
Many people are dismissing the Swedish approach as an 'experiment.' The rhetorical force of this move is to make the approach sound vaguely threatening and unethical, since human-subjects research normally requires ethics review, informed consent, etc. But there's no sense in which the Swedish approach is more of an experiment than anybody else's: everyone's shooting in the dark here. And an approach doesn't become any more or less of an experiment because everybody else is trying it at the same time.
There are two things I wish the Swedish government did differently. First, I wish they routinely showed their work. Second, I wish they did more testing.
Even so, I'm happy to live in a country where actual epidemiologists have so much influence. Not because they are perfect, but because the alternative so often is far worse.
I'm not in agreement with everything and there are people who thing that that he may be wrong about Japan and that Japan is covering up a huge amount by not testing, as the U.S. did.
For many of us, the mindset and beliefs he's demonstrated about women (51% of the people whose needs he has sworn to represent) means he is incompetent, before he even makes his first act. It is a different definition of the word.
Are you trolling me? Because if you are I gotta say, well done. 10/10.
I'm not trolling you at all. I know you don't post about football on this forum... ever... but if you did, you'd know that I can do a much better job of trolling. I don't like Kushner in the least. The post you quoted shows that. He's scum. But your OP was ridiculous and, instead of saying, "eh... maybe those examples were me arguing in bad faith (heh)," you decided to pull an Andy. But guys who like this...
...are giving you likes, so maybe it's not all bad.
Because unless you include a bunch of ridiculous wording your entire premise of the US being 'ruled' by royal families falls apart.
Did he make sure to let Facebook know they don't have his permission to use his pictures and posts?
Here is Marc Lipsitch:
"Imagine you are in a small boat far, far from shore. A surprise storm capsizes the boat and tosses you into the sea. You try to tame your panic, somehow find the boat’s flimsy but still floating life raft, and struggle into it. You catch your breath, look around, and try to think what to do next. Thinking clearly is hard to do after a near-drowning experience.
You do, though, realize two important things: First, the raft is saving your life for the moment and you need to stay in it until you have a better plan. Second, the raft is not a viable long-term option and you need to get to land."
The U.S. faces three options until there is immunity/a vaccine: (1) Relax social distancing in a short while and let things take their course -- this will overwhelm the medical system; (2) Try to do things by waves (lock down, relax, lock down, relax, and so on) -- but their modelling suggests that this will take several cycles; (3) Really intensify lockdown with huge amounts of testing and tracking. But the lack of the capacity for testing not to mention the cultural resistance to so much tracking and monitoring (i.d. cards to show your disease status) make this really unlikely for the U.S.
Pick your poison.
The U.S. is being rule by lizards from outer space. Use your god damn brain, numbnuts.
To date, the most illuminating thing about the last 151 pages of pure **** in this thread is the fact that @venecol is 70 years old. I would have sworn he was maybe 40 at the oldest.
Weird. I thought you were better than this but apparently not.
First, your memory clearly sucks because I post on the football forum. I'll shelve this right next to all those times I allegedly bragged about having an undergrad degree from Miami.
Second, you allegedly don't like Kushner, my post allegedly sucked, but yet you can't even scratch the surface on substance. To wit: Do you think Jared Kushner is qualified to lead a response to a global pandemic, middle east peace, the opioid epidemic, or government modernization? If so, explain why? Can you point to an example of Chelsea, Jenna, or Barbara being tasked with an issue of comparable significance?
I pray that you let Satan enter your heart so you can be freed from these lies. So mote it be.
He is a troll, always has been. When he isnt posting here, he is posting on 8Chan
It's 8kun now, you boomer cuck antifa soyboy alt-right Trump cultist TDS sufferer
Even with production cuts, there is reduced demand. My tanks been on empty for over a week. With no demand, prices should not go up. Not an economist but a 25% price increase in the middle of a pandemic that's creating a recession makes no sense to me.
The stock market is not a reaction to this weeks stats.
Besides, everyone unemployed will receive unemployment checks plus $600 a week.
Separate names with a comma.