7 ms·

Most people I’ve talked to pushing for government to reopen things have lost jobs and businesses... or are about to. Their basic survival needs are being threat

Most people I’ve talked to pushing for government to reopen things have lost jobs and businesses... or are about to. Their basic survival needs are being threatened. Show a little more compassion. I recommend talking to some people instead of parroting the pictures you see in the news.

ohashi 6y ago
Many people who want a stay at home are at risk and don't want to die. Where is their compassion?
mindslight 6y ago
That's false compassion. What you're effectively arguing is for those people to increase their family's exposure in a last-ditch attempt to save their business (and probably still lose it anyway), rather than directly addressing the economic problems facing them. The cognitive dissonance comes about because it's not very American to expect or ask for help. Even though we're mainly in this position because the government itself mismanaged economic policy for decades, resulting in us being collectively overleveraged.
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
People's basic survival needs have been threatened before this when they would get laid off. The entire rust belt became a cesspool of opiate and heroin addicts and no one cared when companies moved manufacturing offshore. No one cared that healthcare is tied to jobs. I've talked to a lot of people who said yea I need to work, but I don't WANT to work, I have to. And that is not a failure of the lockdown. it is a failure of this very nation to take care of its own so that the rich can get richer.
- ericmay 6y ago
  > The entire rust belt became a cesspool of opiate and heroin addicts Is this really necessary? It's a very inaccurate, and hurtful thing to say.
  - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
    Perhaps the wording is a bit harsh - not everywhere is a cesspool, a lot of places have bounced back, but the rust belt is particularly bad in area of opioid abuse - that is fact and very accurate. https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-summaries-by-state https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-summari...
    - ericmay 6y ago
      I can find a bunch of articles summarizing the West Coast as a cesspool of heroin, homelessness, and opioid use as well. https://www.city-journal.org/opiods-homelessness-west-coast https://www.city-journal.org/opiods-homelessness-west-coast https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-crisis-explained/ https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-c... https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-12-26/homelessness-spike-in-california-causes-national-rise-for-third-year-in-a-row https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-12-26/... Maybe California is a cesspool too? https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/as-opioid-epidemic-hits-home-what-officials-are-doing-about-it/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/as-opioid-ep... Or maybe Seattle?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - altoidaltoid 6y ago
        Yeah, but people still want to live there vs. Youngstown or Cleveland
        ericmay 6y ago
        People still want to live in those locations, evidenced by the fact that there are still people living there and getting along ok. Maybe you're a doctor and want to work at one of the two best hospitals on the planet, then you'd move to Cleveland, for example. Maybe you want to go to the #1 CS program on the planet, so you go to CMU. And who knows. Maybe now with more companies going remote or encouraging more remote work, fewer people will feel compelled to move to the Bay Area or whatever. Anyway. My point isn't to get into "x is better than y" because, frankly, it's not that interesting. But combating stereotypes about locations and geographies or peoples is of interest. Calling the Rust Belt area a cesspool, is pretty pathetic, especially when despite all the nice weather California has its own "cesspool" problems to deal with. If you just spend a lot of time reading coast newspapers it's easy to magnify problems in other areas. In fact, why is it that leading population centers like New York, D.C., and S.F. were able to spend so much energy destroying and outsourcing manufacturing at the expense of their fellow Americans? Why did regulators and politicians in D.C., along with our medical establishment and pharmaceutical companies allow so many opioids to be prescribed? If you're going to destroy the coal industry because of regulation (which I support) why aren't you also advocating for finding meaningful employment for those who are regulated out of a job? Maybe they should move to SF and learn to code? Well, now they might get their chance, and Twitter et al. may be paying them $60,000 year to do tech jobs that were $200,000/year in NYC or SF or Seattle. The U.S. really needs to get its shit together and start caring about one another. I've never in my life thought that one part of the country was a cesspool or worthy of ridicule, even if I disagreed with politics there.
ric2b 6y ago
But the solution is a stronger welfare system, like a UBI, not forcing people to work while risking their lives or go without food.
mehrdadn 6y ago
So at the risk of asking a dumb question: why aren't protesters demanding e.g. more economic aid instead of a reopening? It's not like giving money to people in this crisis is a taboo anymore... it was one thing both the Congress and the White House agreed on for once. And it's not like if everything reopens then they're going to be instantly back in business. A lot of people will still stay home anyway. Wouldn't it be a lot more logical to demand payments or some other form of direct aid so that they can actually survive both economically and medically? Instead of making it a zero-sum game demanding everyone trade off a dubious-at-best chance at economic survival for a far more certain chance of a public health crisis (if not worse)?
- JPKab 6y ago
  Maybe because the protesters don't want handouts from agencies which have done a very poor job dispersing said handouts already. I can go to a superstore which is deemed essential because it sells groceries and buy all sorts of items that specialty stores aren't able to sell me because they're closed. any member of the public can enter these superstores with no screening whatsoever. The small business owners would screen customers much more effectively than a large store would. It's almost like we've taken steps that are arbitrary in nature and aren't actually scientifically valid because we don't have enough data on this virus and how it actually spreads. these arbitrary measures are then doubled down upon by the local governments in the name of preserving their authority and looking good to the press. what really bugs me is the level of certainty that people seem to have about this. I'm coming from a position of uncertainty. Anyone being honest right now is doing the same. Look at your comment: you are absolutely certain that a dubious at best chance of economic survival for small businesses is being traded against a certain chance of a public health crisis. I don't think you're being honest with yourself with a level of certainty like that. You're just like the rest of us flying blind, but you are just positive that you are right and that businesses should be closed to support your preconceived notions. It's real easy to do that when you have a job that allows you to work remotely. It's not costing you anything just let those Walmart shopping losers go out and deal with the unemployment system. In the meantime a percentage of all of our tax dollars goes to paying off interest on the national debt and that percentage is going to have to increase as a result of this. I'm not a moron or a science denier. I'm fine with taking on debt to the degree necessary to maximize public health. But there are multiple dimensions to public health not just this virus. My brother's business is in jeopardy and it was growing fast before this pandemic hit. Now I'm deeply concerned that he's going to fall back to an addiction that he beat 10 years ago. That's a tiny story that represents something that's going to happen in this country when young people who would otherwise be unaffected by the virus or going to suffer economic calamity. By the way my brother always voted Democratic. Due to the false partisan positioning of opening versus reopening pushed by the media, he is now never going to vote Democrat again and plans to vote for Trump in November. He voted for Clinton last time think about that. In the meantime people on keyboards who were going to vote for Biden anyway are now pushing policies that are going to hand this election to Trump. Maybe the elderly will carry Biden since many appear to be switching their votes. But when they're dead in a few years the young people who have lost their businesses will still be voting. It's not going to go well.
ascagnel_ 6y ago
In an ideal world, the shelter-in-place orders would have done a few things: - Slowed the spread of the virus, so it won't overwhelm the capacity of a nation's healthcare system - Build up testing and tracing capacity to track future spread. In the US, the SIP orders are an overwhelming success on the first point, and cases are slowly starting to drop off. On the second point, the US is still far, far behind on testing. For a nation the size of the US, there needs to be something on the order of 2 million tests per day, compared to the the current capacity of roughly 300,000. I cannot overstate how important this testing failure is; without it, businesses will be closed for longer, more jobs will be lost permanently, and the citizens get frustrated that they're stuck at home without any income. If there was adequate testing capacity, businesses could reopen with precautions, and the government could sustainably offer benefits to those testing positive so they can afford to stay home and not spread the virus any further. If there isn't adequate testing capacity, even with precautions, future waves are more likely, and any of those waves can overwhelm the healthcare system.

ohashi 6y ago

Many people who want a stay at home are at risk and don't want to die. Where is their compassion?

mindslight 6y ago

That's false compassion. What you're effectively arguing is for those people to increase their family's exposure in a last-ditch attempt to save their business (and probably still lose it anyway), rather than directly addressing the economic problems facing them. The cognitive dissonance comes about because it's not very American to expect or ask for help. Even though we're mainly in this position because the government itself mismanaged economic policy for decades, resulting in us being collectively overleveraged.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

People's basic survival needs have been threatened before this when they would get laid off. The entire rust belt became a cesspool of opiate and heroin addicts and no one cared when companies moved manufacturing offshore. No one cared that healthcare is tied to jobs. I've talked to a lot of people who said yea I need to work, but I don't WANT to work, I have to. And that is not a failure of the lockdown. it is a failure of this very nation to take care of its own so that the rich can get richer.

ericmay 6y ago
> The entire rust belt became a cesspool of opiate and heroin addicts Is this really necessary? It's a very inaccurate, and hurtful thing to say.
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  Perhaps the wording is a bit harsh - not everywhere is a cesspool, a lot of places have bounced back, but the rust belt is particularly bad in area of opioid abuse - that is fact and very accurate. https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-summaries-by-state https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-summari...
  - ericmay 6y ago
    I can find a bunch of articles summarizing the West Coast as a cesspool of heroin, homelessness, and opioid use as well. https://www.city-journal.org/opiods-homelessness-west-coast https://www.city-journal.org/opiods-homelessness-west-coast https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-crisis-explained/ https://calmatters.org/explainers/californias-homelessness-c... https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-12-26/homelessness-spike-in-california-causes-national-rise-for-third-year-in-a-row https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2019-12-26/... Maybe California is a cesspool too? https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/as-opioid-epidemic-hits-home-what-officials-are-doing-about-it/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/as-opioid-ep... Or maybe Seattle?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - altoidaltoid 6y ago
      Yeah, but people still want to live there vs. Youngstown or Cleveland
      - ericmay 6y ago
        People still want to live in those locations, evidenced by the fact that there are still people living there and getting along ok. Maybe you're a doctor and want to work at one of the two best hospitals on the planet, then you'd move to Cleveland, for example. Maybe you want to go to the #1 CS program on the planet, so you go to CMU. And who knows. Maybe now with more companies going remote or encouraging more remote work, fewer people will feel compelled to move to the Bay Area or whatever. Anyway. My point isn't to get into "x is better than y" because, frankly, it's not that interesting. But combating stereotypes about locations and geographies or peoples is of interest. Calling the Rust Belt area a cesspool, is pretty pathetic, especially when despite all the nice weather California has its own "cesspool" problems to deal with. If you just spend a lot of time reading coast newspapers it's easy to magnify problems in other areas. In fact, why is it that leading population centers like New York, D.C., and S.F. were able to spend so much energy destroying and outsourcing manufacturing at the expense of their fellow Americans? Why did regulators and politicians in D.C., along with our medical establishment and pharmaceutical companies allow so many opioids to be prescribed? If you're going to destroy the coal industry because of regulation (which I support) why aren't you also advocating for finding meaningful employment for those who are regulated out of a job? Maybe they should move to SF and learn to code? Well, now they might get their chance, and Twitter et al. may be paying them $60,000 year to do tech jobs that were $200,000/year in NYC or SF or Seattle. The U.S. really needs to get its shit together and start caring about one another. I've never in my life thought that one part of the country was a cesspool or worthy of ridicule, even if I disagreed with politics there.

ric2b 6y ago

But the solution is a stronger welfare system, like a UBI, not forcing people to work while risking their lives or go without food.

mehrdadn 6y ago

So at the risk of asking a dumb question: why aren't protesters demanding e.g. more economic aid instead of a reopening? It's not like giving money to people in this crisis is a taboo anymore... it was one thing both the Congress and the White House agreed on for once. And it's not like if everything reopens then they're going to be instantly back in business. A lot of people will still stay home anyway. Wouldn't it be a lot more logical to demand payments or some other form of direct aid so that they can actually survive both economically and medically? Instead of making it a zero-sum game demanding everyone trade off a dubious-at-best chance at economic survival for a far more certain chance of a public health crisis (if not worse)?

JPKab 6y ago
Maybe because the protesters don't want handouts from agencies which have done a very poor job dispersing said handouts already. I can go to a superstore which is deemed essential because it sells groceries and buy all sorts of items that specialty stores aren't able to sell me because they're closed. any member of the public can enter these superstores with no screening whatsoever. The small business owners would screen customers much more effectively than a large store would. It's almost like we've taken steps that are arbitrary in nature and aren't actually scientifically valid because we don't have enough data on this virus and how it actually spreads. these arbitrary measures are then doubled down upon by the local governments in the name of preserving their authority and looking good to the press. what really bugs me is the level of certainty that people seem to have about this. I'm coming from a position of uncertainty. Anyone being honest right now is doing the same. Look at your comment: you are absolutely certain that a dubious at best chance of economic survival for small businesses is being traded against a certain chance of a public health crisis. I don't think you're being honest with yourself with a level of certainty like that. You're just like the rest of us flying blind, but you are just positive that you are right and that businesses should be closed to support your preconceived notions. It's real easy to do that when you have a job that allows you to work remotely. It's not costing you anything just let those Walmart shopping losers go out and deal with the unemployment system. In the meantime a percentage of all of our tax dollars goes to paying off interest on the national debt and that percentage is going to have to increase as a result of this. I'm not a moron or a science denier. I'm fine with taking on debt to the degree necessary to maximize public health. But there are multiple dimensions to public health not just this virus. My brother's business is in jeopardy and it was growing fast before this pandemic hit. Now I'm deeply concerned that he's going to fall back to an addiction that he beat 10 years ago. That's a tiny story that represents something that's going to happen in this country when young people who would otherwise be unaffected by the virus or going to suffer economic calamity. By the way my brother always voted Democratic. Due to the false partisan positioning of opening versus reopening pushed by the media, he is now never going to vote Democrat again and plans to vote for Trump in November. He voted for Clinton last time think about that. In the meantime people on keyboards who were going to vote for Biden anyway are now pushing policies that are going to hand this election to Trump. Maybe the elderly will carry Biden since many appear to be switching their votes. But when they're dead in a few years the young people who have lost their businesses will still be voting. It's not going to go well.

ascagnel_ 6y ago

In an ideal world, the shelter-in-place orders would have done a few things: - Slowed the spread of the virus, so it won't overwhelm the capacity of a nation's healthcare system - Build up testing and tracing capacity to track future spread. In the US, the SIP orders are an overwhelming success on the first point, and cases are slowly starting to drop off. On the second point, the US is still far, far behind on testing. For a nation the size of the US, there needs to be something on the order of 2 million tests per day, compared to the the current capacity of roughly 300,000. I cannot overstate how important this testing failure is; without it, businesses will be closed for longer, more jobs will be lost permanently, and the citizens get frustrated that they're stuck at home without any income. If there was adequate testing capacity, businesses could reopen with precautions, and the government could sustainably offer benefits to those testing positive so they can afford to stay home and not spread the virus any further. If there isn't adequate testing capacity, even with precautions, future waves are more likely, and any of those waves can overwhelm the healthcare system.