4 ms·

> The stress off our health care system as a result of lockdowns and the lives saved is enormous. This is all supposition that says nothing about the horrific

> The stress off our health care system as a result of lockdowns and the lives saved is enormous. This is all supposition that says nothing about the horrific costs. You could be right, but this won’t be apparent for a while and it’d be nice if people at least had the humility to admit they’re making a bet and forcing a plan on people that will destroy their livelihoods. What makes this particularly offensive is that the authorities have little accountability and skin in the game. The “libertarian” approach at least respects the dignity of people to assess risks they’re willing to take and assume the responsibility for the costs of the measures they take.

boringg 6y ago
I don't think any authorities have taken these decisions flippantly and if you have seen the amount of hate fired specifically towards them and their families I challenge your assumption that they have no skin in the game. Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. No one is saying it is proven to be successful, no one has had a pandemic or a virus this dangerous replicate itself globally in an incredibly short period of time. This isn't a panacea it's survival mode. We've been in a pretty unknown unprecedented state since February with some pretty bad information coming from the Feds to sow doubt into the equation. What is your solution given the benefit of hindsight? Go the Texas approach? If you look at death per capita in CA it's highest in the red counties that didn't do any lockdowns and have the lowest population density. Meanwhile the second most dense city in North America (SF) has an incredibly low rate of mortality and infection with some pretty tough measures in place.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  > Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. Was it well educated when the surgeon general said don't wear masks? The takeaway is that practically no one should be feeling sure-footed right now about their understanding of something as complex as the net-effect of a pandemic and counter-measures. The hubris I see in practically everyone nowadays suggests to me people are more politically devoted to their opinions and defending them. It is totally possible that lockdown measures will be shown to be marginally effective or net-negative in terms of life-years lost in several years time, factoring in the disruption to everyone's lives, children in particular.
  - boringg 6y ago
    Your gambit is a bit tough to swallow. Saving the lives of people currently and reducing the spread of a virus quickly vs a speculative view that in the long term the pandemic will have a worse out-come factoring in all the costs. Thats a very tough operational decision to make. Though, to be fair, I think we will have a good sense of how that factored out in comparing Texas to California over the next medium to longer term. I don't feel sure footed in the pandemic. I do feel absolutely certain in the science that masks work, vaccines work as do social distancing measures for reducing the spread. If you are implying that the surgeon general said don't wear masks then yes I would say it was an uneducated statement or alternatively that he was under political duress to appease the president's administration. After all the Surgeon General is a political appointee serving at the whim of the president. Are there better ways to implement shutdowns? Probably yes. Are those difficult decisions to make? Absolutely. Are they made with imperfect information? Yes. I'm not politically devoted to my position - what part of my comments have been political?
- ghostwriter 6y ago
  > Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. I'd like to see that scientific research that proved that it's definitely permissible to continue filmmaking in LA County, while dining outside a small restaurant is an intolerable risk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-86gfJosHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-86gfJosHc
  - boringg 6y ago
    I think you are conflating what I am talking about being the general scientific consensus that says that masks, social distance and vaccines work compared to specific local rules on shutdowns. You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research.
    - ghostwriter 6y ago
      ok, I'd like to see a scientific research that proves that face coverings (not medical face masks within the first couple of hours in a hospital environment, and not n95 masks, but all these various "face coverings" that are mandatory in the majority of places across the nation) that people use on a daily basis, without access to proper washing and cleaning facilities available at hospitals, are indeed effective at preventing the spread of the virus. > You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research. Does it mean that in the context of this particular location and this particular ruling, you condemn Newsom and Garcetti and are willing to inform your elected government representatives about it?
      - boringg 6y ago
        Go do your research, I’m not here to do the research that you can’t be bothered to do yourself. And I’m not here to get into a political argument with you about lockdown in LA. You brought both those things up and clearly have an ax to grind. Best of luck sorting it out.
        deleted 6y ago
- matz1 6y ago
  Saving lives is good but not at the expense of destroying other people life due to lockdowns. The virus is much less danger than the risk of lockdown. Yes, i much much prefer to live in place where there are no covid related restriction or lockdown whatsoever. Lockdown is never needed in the first place.

boringg 6y ago

I don't think any authorities have taken these decisions flippantly and if you have seen the amount of hate fired specifically towards them and their families I challenge your assumption that they have no skin in the game. Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. No one is saying it is proven to be successful, no one has had a pandemic or a virus this dangerous replicate itself globally in an incredibly short period of time. This isn't a panacea it's survival mode. We've been in a pretty unknown unprecedented state since February with some pretty bad information coming from the Feds to sow doubt into the equation. What is your solution given the benefit of hindsight? Go the Texas approach? If you look at death per capita in CA it's highest in the red counties that didn't do any lockdowns and have the lowest population density. Meanwhile the second most dense city in North America (SF) has an incredibly low rate of mortality and infection with some pretty tough measures in place.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. Was it well educated when the surgeon general said don't wear masks? The takeaway is that practically no one should be feeling sure-footed right now about their understanding of something as complex as the net-effect of a pandemic and counter-measures. The hubris I see in practically everyone nowadays suggests to me people are more politically devoted to their opinions and defending them. It is totally possible that lockdown measures will be shown to be marginally effective or net-negative in terms of life-years lost in several years time, factoring in the disruption to everyone's lives, children in particular.
- boringg 6y ago
  Your gambit is a bit tough to swallow. Saving the lives of people currently and reducing the spread of a virus quickly vs a speculative view that in the long term the pandemic will have a worse out-come factoring in all the costs. Thats a very tough operational decision to make. Though, to be fair, I think we will have a good sense of how that factored out in comparing Texas to California over the next medium to longer term. I don't feel sure footed in the pandemic. I do feel absolutely certain in the science that masks work, vaccines work as do social distancing measures for reducing the spread. If you are implying that the surgeon general said don't wear masks then yes I would say it was an uneducated statement or alternatively that he was under political duress to appease the president's administration. After all the Surgeon General is a political appointee serving at the whim of the president. Are there better ways to implement shutdowns? Probably yes. Are those difficult decisions to make? Absolutely. Are they made with imperfect information? Yes. I'm not politically devoted to my position - what part of my comments have been political?
ghostwriter 6y ago
> Is it a well educated bet based on science? Yes. I'd like to see that scientific research that proved that it's definitely permissible to continue filmmaking in LA County, while dining outside a small restaurant is an intolerable risk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-86gfJosHc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-86gfJosHc
- boringg 6y ago
  I think you are conflating what I am talking about being the general scientific consensus that says that masks, social distance and vaccines work compared to specific local rules on shutdowns. You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research.
  - ghostwriter 6y ago
    ok, I'd like to see a scientific research that proves that face coverings (not medical face masks within the first couple of hours in a hospital environment, and not n95 masks, but all these various "face coverings" that are mandatory in the majority of places across the nation) that people use on a daily basis, without access to proper washing and cleaning facilities available at hospitals, are indeed effective at preventing the spread of the virus. > You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research. Does it mean that in the context of this particular location and this particular ruling, you condemn Newsom and Garcetti and are willing to inform your elected government representatives about it?
    - boringg 6y ago
      Go do your research, I’m not here to do the research that you can’t be bothered to do yourself. And I’m not here to get into a political argument with you about lockdown in LA. You brought both those things up and clearly have an ax to grind. Best of luck sorting it out.
      - deleted 6y ago
matz1 6y ago
Saving lives is good but not at the expense of destroying other people life due to lockdowns. The virus is much less danger than the risk of lockdown. Yes, i much much prefer to live in place where there are no covid related restriction or lockdown whatsoever. Lockdown is never needed in the first place.