Jump to content

Misc Stuff about Life. Part XII


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

How much of an awesome dude is Mike Ve  sent me a couple of lovely one piece curly tops all the way from Arizona. I've already put one of them to use on my upcoming SG2000 build. In other news, I've f

Greetings from Opatija, Croatia. I decided to quit my job and change companies in hope I find people with better work ethics. Few months ago I couldn't imagine quitting cause I love the folks I work w

This is what Pine, MDF and plywood are for. There aren't enough slaps in the world for people who paint wood white.

Posted Images

It's about time these "leaders" were kicked out and replaced with professionals with experience who listen to the science. Almost 100k new cases in the US and about 1000 dying in one day? It's unconscionable. These lockdowns are necessary, even if they're going to be tough to live through. After all, this pandemic simply isn't something that just happens to other people on TV....

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Prostheta said:

It's about time these "leaders" were kicked out and replaced with professionals with experience who listen to the science. Almost 100k new cases in the US and about 1000 dying in one day? It's unconscionable. These lockdowns are necessary, even if they're going to be tough to live through. After all, this pandemic simply isn't something that just happens to other people on TV....

I'm not sure who these experts are that you speak of that could take over the running of a country, virologists and epidemiologists might know about disease but they know nothing about economics or all the other aspects of running a country, so you get those experts in and they will be arguing with the scientists. It's the job of ministers to take a balanced approach based on what the experts in all fields are telling them.

100k new positive cases is a scary number, but when you consider that it's about 0.02% of the USA population that should put it into some context, especially when around 10% of the population live in poverty anyway. school leavers and adults in their early 20s have had their careers written off as a result of lockdown and wealth creation has been set back by at least a generation, probably more. It is those on the breadline that are most affected by the lockdown and who will suffer the most after the lockdown so poverty numbers will increase and poverty is arguably much more dangerous than covid 19. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ADFinlayson said:

It's the job of ministers to take a balanced approach based on what the experts in all fields are telling them.

Let's just hope the politicians would prioritise the welfare of the people to their personal craving for power.

Back in the day a minister said to another that his opinion was well argumented but that he'd have to oppose because he was representing a rival party. True story, but very seldom admitted.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Let's just hope the politicians would prioritise the welfare of the people to their personal craving for power.

Back in the day a minister said to another that his opinion was well argumented but that he'd have to oppose because he was representing a rival party. True story, but very seldom admitted.

"welfare of the people", even that is subjective. Do you protect the proportion of the population that will suffer from the virus, or do you protect the economy and the proportion of the population that would suffer from job losses. No government can protect everyone.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost a thousand people a day dying is still almost a thousand people a day. Comparatives aren't valid.

I agree that a government cannot protect everyone, however it can have that motive and perhaps they should? The corollary is that a government should at least try and protect people, and perhaps the people should also play their own part at the other end of the table to help protect each other.

Protecting an economy alone does not protect people. I am not advocating for a complete barter system of localised grey economies either, however a meaningless virtual currency must not take precedence over life and dignity. The wheels of debt-based economies that asymmetrically benefit the ultra-rich must not be greased with the blood of the people behind a tissue-thin veil of "liberty" or disguise the whip as "freedom". As it stands, people are forced into debt slavery as a default and then expected to continue bailing water with a bucket whose bottom was stolen to pay for somebody's wife's SUV of the month.

Elected representatives must absolutely represent the will of the people than selecting an autocratic ruler from a short list of rich connected assholes, who thence tell people "what they want them to want" through gaslighting, populist rhetoric and fascistic ideals. Trump is pissing on people's heads and telling them its raining. I'm still not entirely sure whether he's an incompetent bumbling opportunist or simply a garden fascist yet. Likely the former buoyed by the latter.

The naked truth is that most countries are managing this virus reactively and slightly too hands-off in favour of protecting an economy, and always being a step behind and having to drop strong measures out of nowhere once any ground is lost. It's a difficult thing for the people to swallow when measures feel immediate, Draconian and punitive, however it's necessary compromise as a balance between protection of an economy and protection of "the" people. Complete mismanagement and surrendering to the onslaught of a virus whilst praying on a hail mary that is not coming isn't valid strategy....it's the absolute lack of one.

The approach that seems to be working in countries that are adequately managing this virus seems to be where there is an understanding of social/personal responsibility that is fostered by their government, with a reasoned and more pro-active strategy rather than enforcing strong measures after the fact. It's working here for the most part, and it's certainly working in countries like New Zealand. I'm sure that it doesn't directly translate to huge countries like the US, mostly because it's like trying to gather cats in a bag. Cats that are yowling insurrection, waving guns and being agitated by a cheesy failed business rapist who covers 90% of his head with 10% of his hair. Incidentally, these "militias" are just gangs. Nothing more. Armed domestic terrorist gangs.

Dare I say, "lock him up"? Nah, let's send him, his vile family and spineless lackies to Russia. Then let's get on with tackling the other existential crises that aren't as simple to solve, and maybe figuring out HTF to live peaceably and productively again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

I'm not sure who these experts are that you speak of that could take over the running of a country, virologists and epidemiologists might know about disease but they know nothing about economics or all the other aspects of running a country, so you get those experts in and they will be arguing with the scientists. It's the job of ministers to take a balanced approach based on what the experts in all fields are telling them.

The payback of taking a country into lockdown early is earlier recovery. You only have to look at examples like New Zealand to see what is possible by striking hard and fast. After their first wave (which consisted of a peak of all of about 100 cases per day) their post lockdown period saw pretty much 100% return to normality for everyone. Their lockdown was short and sharp, but their recovery was rapid and more complete. Same approach was applied for their second wave, again, with less than 30 cases per day at its peak (!!).

Here in Australia we had a spike in cases in the state of Victoria a couple of months ago, at its worst up to 700+ per day. The approach taken was to lock down hard in that state, particularly in the capital for a period of six weeks. Victoria is now just coming out of that lockdown, state borders are reopening, case numbers are down to single digits, mask wearing in most states isn't required, the only significant restriction for most people is a 1.5m social distancing requirement. The entire nation even had its first zero case day on the weekend for the first time since March. That's pretty good going for a country with a population about half of the UK.

Compare that to the US and UK approach and it's not hard to see why a lot of other parts of the world question why their approach to COVID19 differs so much. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're currently averaging 200 cases a day, one death per day or thereabouts. We're not locked down, however the emphasis is on social responsibility rather than strict governmental regulation. We have health ministry recommendations on conduct and safety and limited rules on what we're not able to do. That much is keeping the populace calm and unruffled. We get a few problems such as with the high number of foreign workers at Meyer Turku working on the ships (glad I got out of that industry) and with edge cases such as a foreign family who infected/exposed a number of people in schools and workplaces here in Turku. That much can be assigned to cultural differences, especially when it comes to personal space and distancing. A friend of mine was in an elevator with his girlfriend, and two Russian guys just pushed their way in rather than respecting distancing or whatever. I mean, seriously. What even is that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, curtisa said:

The payback of taking a country into lockdown early is earlier recovery. You only have to look at examples like New Zealand to see what is possible by striking hard and fast. After their first wave (which consisted of a peak of all of about 100 cases per day) their post lockdown period saw pretty much 100% return to normality for everyone. Their lockdown was short and sharp, but their recovery was rapid and more complete. Same approach was applied for their second wave, again, with less than 30 cases per day at its peak (!!).

Here in Australia we had a spike in cases in the state of Victoria a couple of months ago, at its worst up to 700+ per day. The approach taken was to lock down hard in that state, particularly in the capital for a period of six weeks. Victoria is now just coming out of that lockdown, state borders are reopening, case numbers are down to single digits, mask wearing in most states isn't required, the only significant restriction for most people is a 1.5m social distancing requirement. The entire nation even had its first zero case day on the weekend for the first time since March. That's pretty good going for a country with a population about half of the UK.

Compare that to the US and UK approach and it's not hard to see why a lot of other parts of the world question why their approach to COVID19 differs so much. 

Locking down hard every time someone sneezes is not sustainable, left wing governors will figure that out eventually, not that there is any value comparing New Zealand to the UK or US given the entire population of New Zealand is half the size of London. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. Being in lockdown in a house with a yard and a workshop and plenty of nice tools and materials isn't too bad. My daughter is now locked down in London, she lives in a single room with five men sharing the house. No pets, no schoolmates... A bed, a desk, a laptop and a keyboard. Guess she can't even practice her singing if any of the men is at home.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

Locking down hard every time someone sneezes is not sustainable, left wing governors will figure that out eventually, not that there is any value comparing New Zealand to the UK or US given the entire population of New Zealand is half the size of London. 

And yet the UK has the worst stats in all of Europe for deaths, some of the worst stats for total cases, Boris has been criticised for delivering a confused and contradictory handling of how to maintain a socially-distanced working society and the country is about to enter into a lockdown until December 2nd that in all likelihood (if the reports are to be believed) will be extended beyond its initial cut-off date.

The comparison against smaller countries is invalid when considering total population/GDP/employment etc, but they do offer something that could be aspired to to at least make life more normal for longer periods of time. New Zealand's PM was recently re-elected to power with an overwhelming majority, a good portion of which was attributed to her navigating the country through two lockdowns. No-one thanked her for being in lockdown, but they were grateful for the clear direction she was issuing.

Imagine how more palatable life would be if instead of 1 million cases and 45K deaths it was 10 times less. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Agreed. Being in lockdown in a house with a yard and a workshop and plenty of nice tools and materials isn't too bad. My daughter is now locked down in London, she lives in a single room with five men sharing the house. No pets, no schoolmates... A bed, a desk, a laptop and a keyboard. Guess she can't even practice her singing if any of the men is at home.

Universities haven't closed, neither have schools or nurseries so she should be able to at least go to lectures but I feel for her paying all that money and moving abroad to be stuck in a flat :( 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, curtisa said:

And yet the UK has the worst stats in all of Europe for deaths, some of the worst stats for total cases, Boris has been criticised for delivering a confused and contradictory handling of how to maintain a socially-distanced working society and the country is about to enter into a lockdown until December 2nd that in all likelihood (if the reports are to be believed) will be extended beyond its initial cut-off date.

The comparison against smaller countries is invalid when considering total population/GDP/employment etc, but they do offer something that could be aspired to to at least make life more normal for longer periods of time. New Zealand's PM was recently re-elected to power with an overwhelming majority, a good portion of which was attributed to her navigating the country through two lockdowns. No-one thanked her for being in lockdown, but they were grateful for the clear direction she was issuing.

Imagine how more palatable life would be if instead of 1 million cases and 45K deaths it was 10 times less. 

I am in no way an advocate of Boris' response to covid, but we have the most obese and unhealthy population in Europe, no surprise that we're seeing high mortality. That being said, anyone testing positive for covid within 28 days of death is marked down as a covid death even if they were run over by a bus, and covid 19 is only the 24th most common cause of death in uk in 2020.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

but we have the most obese and unhealthy population in Europe, no surprise that we're seeing high mortality.

Not sure it's quite as straightforward as that. Obesity rates appear to be quite similar in the UK, Australia and NZ (30-ish percent). If anything Kiwis and Aussies are more a bunch of fatties than the Brits. Even our smoking rates appear to be a bit higher

 

2 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

That being said, anyone testing positive for covid within 28 days of death is marked down as a covid death even if they were run over by a bus

That seems pretty unlikely. A person who died from respiratory failure (or any other probable effect of COVID19) and tested positive for COVID19 within 28 days will be identified as a death from COVID19. A person who got squashed by a falling piano who tested positive to COVID19 within 28 days will be reported as a death by crushing injury. Wouldn't make any difference if that person was HIV-positive before the piano hit him - he clearly didn't die from an autoimmune deficiency.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

Universities haven't closed, neither have schools or nurseries so she should be able to at least go to lectures but I feel for her paying all that money and moving abroad to be stuck in a flat :( 

Yup. At the LCCM they already have most of their lessons online, only one day per week live if I'm right. That's better than the Spring semester which she spent here at home online. I guess she's having her singing lessons there. The biggest problem is that she's studying composing, arranging and performing music. Writing songs in her room is no issue but how to learn to know other students so you can recruit the most suitable people for a band? How to arrange rehearsals? And how to perform in front of a live audience?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, curtisa said:

>snip<

 

That seems pretty unlikely. A person who died from respiratory failure (or any other probable effect of COVID19) and tested positive for COVID19 within 28 days will be identified as a death from COVID19. A person who got squashed by a falling piano who tested positive to COVID19 within 28 days will be reported as a death by crushing injury. Wouldn't make any difference if that person was HIV-positive before the piano hit him - he clearly didn't die from an autoimmune deficiency.

Well , that is exactly what was happening here until the actual facts began to come to light. There were cases of deaths recorded as Covid when the persons died from an automobile accident. Also those that had heart attacks were covid deaths if they had tested positive for covid. Why is it that if one has had or has covid and they were already at a very high risk of something that it is covid that killed them? If they had a heart attack then say that, add that they had possible contributing factors as covid. When someone dies of a heart attack and has the flu, it is a heart attack and the flu may have contributed to it. It is a sioomple way of measuring things.

Otherwise it is a skewing of statistics. I watched a guy say " we had a 300% increase in something" WHatever that something is what is 300% of what? if of 1 then it is a small number, if 500K then it is a very large number. The point is Statistics can be manipulated to sound or look worse than they are or better.

I guess that telling the truth is a hard thing to do when one is trying to convince someone else that they know more about it or they want to alter a view point in a specific direction.

mk

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MiKro said:

Well , that is exactly what was happening here until the actual facts began to come to light. There were cases of deaths recorded as Covid when the persons died from an automobile accident. Also those that had heart attacks were covid deaths if they had tested positive for covid. Why is it that if one has had or has covid and they were already at a very high risk of something that it is covid that killed them? If they had a heart attack then say that, add that they had possible contributing factors as covid. When someone dies of a heart attack and has the flu, it is a heart attack and the flu may have contributed to it. It is a sioomple way of measuring things.

Otherwise it is a skewing of statistics. I watched a guy say " we had a 300% increase in something" WHatever that something is what is 300% of what? if of 1 then it is a small number, if 500K then it is a very large number. The point is Statistics can be manipulated to sound or look worse than they are or better.

mk

There is a confirmed case, I can't remember where now, of a guy that was killed in a motorcycle accident, but because he had been tested for the China virus by the coroner, he was listed as a virus death and not because of an accident. That was just one, how many others were there before people started paying attention.

Any death in a hospital got paid more for a virus death than a non-virus death. Some records were "doctored" to gain the system. So, the numbers cannot be trusted until an investigation has taken place to verify the actual COD.

 

Ron

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, RonMay said:

There is a confirmed case, I can't remember where now, of a guy that was killed in a motorcycle accident, but because he had been tested for the China virus by the coroner, he was listed as a virus death and not because of an accident. That was just one, how many others were there before people started paying attention.

Any death in a hospital got paid more for a virus death than a non-virus death. Some records were "doctored" to gain the system. So, the numbers cannot be trusted until an investigation has taken place to verify the actual COD.

 

Ron

That is my point. I am not saying that covid is a small item as it is a REAL problem, We do need to know the REAL facts though, not skewed to scare everyone. We all need to abide by some basic rules to help slow covid and I have no problem with abiding by some solid rules, but not something cooked up from the use of scare tactics and skewed statistics..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MiKro said:

Well , that is exactly what was happening here until the actual facts began to come to light. There were cases of deaths recorded as Covid when the persons died from an automobile accident

 

2 hours ago, RonMay said:

There is a confirmed case, I can't remember where now, of a guy that was killed in a motorcycle accident, but because he had been tested for the China virus by the coroner, he was listed as a virus death and not because of an accident.

I see. Do you have a source for the story(ies)?

BTW Ron, please refrain from referring to the virus using such a term. Aside from the fact that COVID is easier to type and has fewer syllables to pronounce, there may be readers here who find the description of the virus in a way that labels a whole nation as somehow responsible for the disease offensive.

 

2 hours ago, RonMay said:

Any death in a hospital got paid more for a virus death than a non-virus death. Some records were "doctored" to gain the system. So, the numbers cannot be trusted until an investigation has taken place to verify the actual COD.

Quite frankly that sounds preposterous. Why would any hospital want to report unrelated deaths as due to COVID19 in order to gain from the situation? The primary reason most countries are attempting to minimise the impact the disease has on their citizens is to save their hospital and medical systems from total collapse. It's in their interest to keep people away from the hospitals to ensure that patients who actually need care can receive it. Fewer people showing up requiring urgent and critical medical care due to COVID19 (and potentially dying from it while in there) is actually a good thing. You only have to look at what happened in Italy and Spain during their first waves to see how bad things got for the hospitals. Why would anyone want to see a repeat of that?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, curtisa said:

 

>snip<

 

Quite frankly that sounds preposterous. Why would any hospital want to report unrelated deaths as due to COVID19 in order to gain from the situation? The primary reason most countries are attempting to minimise the impact the disease has on their citizens is to save their hospital and medical systems from total collapse. It's in their interest to keep people away from the hospitals to ensure that patients who actually need care can receive it. Fewer people showing up requiring urgent and critical medical care due to COVID19 (and potentially dying from it while in there) is actually a good thing. You only have to look at what happened in Italy and Spain during their first waves to see how bad things got for the hospitals. Why would anyone want to see a repeat of that?

It has to do with $$$$ and greed. So many of our hospitals and doctors rely on the government  in ways many of us have no idea of. They prey on Federal money and those that are willing to let them have it. Many of our private hospitals were given extra $$$ to have beds ready just in case. So what did they do they added more beds that stayed empty all while getting federal $$$.

Case in point. In 2005 after Hurricane Katrina hit, Dallas area hospitals were given Federal $$$ to have beds ready for anyone that was affected by Katina that came from Louisiana. I had surgery 2 days later and they did not have a bed for me because of this since I was supposed to be day surgery that turned out to be a whole lot worse than expected. Which in turn made it where I need to be hospitalized.  They had 3 floors that were empty of patients waiting for any that may show up from the hurricane ravaged area of Lousiana. The Feds payed them for those beds. All while I had to stay in post op for 2 days before I could get a bed. I developed a MRSA staph infection in the post op because of that and it almost killed me.

So please don't say that is preposterous as I was there and it does happen. Greed does weird shit to companies and people.

America has its good sides but there are many very unscrupulous people and organizations here as well. Our Government is also just as guilty on both sides of that swamp.

MK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...