4 ms·

I think that's because nothings different then when it all started. If we open everything up we'll just see new cases again

by tayo42 7y ago

rootusrootus 7y ago
This may be true for years. We need to be realistic, and remember that the goal all along has been to flatten the curve, not eliminate all infections.
- tayo42 7y ago
  Flatten the curve is to make sure there is enough available resources to help people who are sick. Nothings changed though, so opening things up means we'll likely be overwhelmed. Why take the risk to end up like any of regions that were hit hard? So yes it'll be true for years, we need to learn to live with this virus, we haven't done that yet
  - standardUser 7y ago
    "...opening things up means we'll likely be overwhelmed" Only if you myopically believe there is only one way to "open up". But no one would believe that since it only takes ten minutes to read about the dozens of different ways European economies have already eased their lockdowns in recent weeks. This is not and has never been an on/off proposition.
tbrock 7y ago
So what is the plan for re-opening then? If we continue to shelter in place we just push the curve out instead of flattening it. We need to start reintroducing people to society at a measured pace to actually flatten it. Don’t misunderstand me, pushing the curve out has tremendous value in that we can better prepare but it also has a tremendous cost. How many business and livelihoods will be ruined because we couldn’t reopen until a vaccine was available? It seems crazy to sacrifice most of what makes this city great while the “smartest political minds” do what’s best for their career by transforming it into a partisan issue.
- tayo42 7y ago
  Gavin Newsome gave his criteria for reopening California, it doesn't require a vaccine. Having people die in large numbers is always worse then some people going through tough times. It's unfortunate our national government is incompetent and making it political. If the city is great it will bounce back. The bay area isn't the only place going through this, the whole world is
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    It's not a matter of dying vs not dying. It's a matter of people dying from covid or dying from stress related disease like heart attacks, suicide, etc with economic collapse. It's impossible to know before hand the exact prescriptive policies to minimize death over-all. Make no mistake, leadership is going by their gut on this. There are models, but the models are not precisely predictive, they are directionally persuasive.
standardUser 7y ago
There are a thousand gradients between the current lockdown and "open everything up". Almost no one is arguing we should open everything. Hearing this false choice over and over is getting old fast.
- tayo42 7y ago
  Currently workers on beef production are getting sick and factories are closing. Now you can go to parks, beaches, grocery shopping, order food. What do you so deperately need to do? Have a beer in a bar? 80% of americans dont want to have anything start opening again. And when you do force things open again you force workers who dont want to go back to work and feel its unsafe to go back to start working again, theres no benefits to recieve.
  - standardUser 7y ago
    "What do you so deperately need to do? " What a bizarre thing to ask. As if we need some special justification for wanting the lockdowns to be both effective and as permissive as possible. It would be strange for someone to want restrictions to be more stringent just for the sake of stringency. Efficacy is what matters, and "more strict" does not necessarily equal more effective. If we knew we could open up school for small children without causing an intolerable spike in the transmission rate, wouldn't we want to do this? Of course we would. That's exactly what's happening in Germany and Denmark right now.
    - tayo42 7y ago
      more people live in los angeles then in denmark. how that can be comparable to the us? transmission is higher indoors, why would you put kids in schools? do you have a source on german schools for little kids being open? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-schools/germany-to-shut-most-schools-to-slow-coronavirus-spread-idUSKBN2100SA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-german...
      - standardUser 7y ago

I think that's because nothings different then when it all started. If we open everything up we'll just see new cases again

by tayo42 7y ago

I think that's because nothings different then when it all started. If we open everything up we'll just see new cases again

rootusrootus 7y ago

This may be true for years. We need to be realistic, and remember that the goal all along has been to flatten the curve, not eliminate all infections.

tayo42 7y ago
Flatten the curve is to make sure there is enough available resources to help people who are sick. Nothings changed though, so opening things up means we'll likely be overwhelmed. Why take the risk to end up like any of regions that were hit hard? So yes it'll be true for years, we need to learn to live with this virus, we haven't done that yet
- standardUser 7y ago
  "...opening things up means we'll likely be overwhelmed" Only if you myopically believe there is only one way to "open up". But no one would believe that since it only takes ten minutes to read about the dozens of different ways European economies have already eased their lockdowns in recent weeks. This is not and has never been an on/off proposition.

tbrock 7y ago

So what is the plan for re-opening then? If we continue to shelter in place we just push the curve out instead of flattening it. We need to start reintroducing people to society at a measured pace to actually flatten it. Don’t misunderstand me, pushing the curve out has tremendous value in that we can better prepare but it also has a tremendous cost. How many business and livelihoods will be ruined because we couldn’t reopen until a vaccine was available? It seems crazy to sacrifice most of what makes this city great while the “smartest political minds” do what’s best for their career by transforming it into a partisan issue.

tayo42 7y ago
Gavin Newsome gave his criteria for reopening California, it doesn't require a vaccine. Having people die in large numbers is always worse then some people going through tough times. It's unfortunate our national government is incompetent and making it political. If the city is great it will bounce back. The bay area isn't the only place going through this, the whole world is
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  It's not a matter of dying vs not dying. It's a matter of people dying from covid or dying from stress related disease like heart attacks, suicide, etc with economic collapse. It's impossible to know before hand the exact prescriptive policies to minimize death over-all. Make no mistake, leadership is going by their gut on this. There are models, but the models are not precisely predictive, they are directionally persuasive.

standardUser 7y ago

There are a thousand gradients between the current lockdown and "open everything up". Almost no one is arguing we should open everything. Hearing this false choice over and over is getting old fast.

tayo42 7y ago
Currently workers on beef production are getting sick and factories are closing. Now you can go to parks, beaches, grocery shopping, order food. What do you so deperately need to do? Have a beer in a bar? 80% of americans dont want to have anything start opening again. And when you do force things open again you force workers who dont want to go back to work and feel its unsafe to go back to start working again, theres no benefits to recieve.
- standardUser 7y ago
  "What do you so deperately need to do? " What a bizarre thing to ask. As if we need some special justification for wanting the lockdowns to be both effective and as permissive as possible. It would be strange for someone to want restrictions to be more stringent just for the sake of stringency. Efficacy is what matters, and "more strict" does not necessarily equal more effective. If we knew we could open up school for small children without causing an intolerable spike in the transmission rate, wouldn't we want to do this? Of course we would. That's exactly what's happening in Germany and Denmark right now.
  - tayo42 7y ago
    more people live in los angeles then in denmark. how that can be comparable to the us? transmission is higher indoors, why would you put kids in schools? do you have a source on german schools for little kids being open? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-schools/germany-to-shut-most-schools-to-slow-coronavirus-spread-idUSKBN2100SA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-german...
    - standardUser 7y ago