OT Coronavirus: America in chaos, News and Updates. 240,000 Americans dead and counting

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by SlyPokerDog, Jan 3, 2020.

  1. Hoopguru

    Hoopguru Know where you are going or end up somewhere else!

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Messages:
    9,420
    Likes Received:
    7,586
    Trophy Points:
    113
    what i read some where is that 85% of the people that tested positive had been wearing mask. I think, like my wife and I when at hoe or in our yard we dont wear mask, when in stores and such we do.
    Ill be honest though, there have been occasions where we visit our kids and we took them off and sat apart outside.
     
  2. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    25,753
    Likes Received:
    10,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
  3. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,276
    Likes Received:
    7,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
  4. andalusian

    andalusian Season - Restarted

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    10,896
    Likes Received:
    7,173
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    San Marcos, CA
    The study that was referred to was not on the effectiveness of wearing a mask, but on the behavior of some of the people that were infected. Of those, 85% said that they wore the mask some-time, but it does not indicate how often it was and if everyone they were in contact with also wore masks.

    So, if a household of 5 people are all infected, 4 of them wore masks when outside and one not - and they all got infected because of that 5th one - we would still have a 80% of infected people wore masks. So, obviously, this is a tainted statistic.

    The proper study would have been to look at a population of people that always wear masks or interact only with people that always wear masks and compare those to a group that never does - and compare the infection rates among them.

    Wearing a mask will not protect you if you interact with people that do not in an unprotected manner. It's that simple.

    Basically, it is the president trying to float his "each to his own" policy vs. the decent idea that people are responsible for each other and should work to benefit others, not just themselves.
     
  5. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,638
    Likes Received:
    11,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    GoBlazersGo likes this.
  6. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,276
    Likes Received:
    7,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
  7. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,638
    Likes Received:
    11,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    25,753
    Likes Received:
    10,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
  9. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,638
    Likes Received:
    11,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree Pelosi was snarky and defensive

    what I don't agree with is the idiotic idea that if Pelosi had agreed with the white house proposal there would be a stimulus bill passed...which was the explicit thrust of Blitzer's questions.

    the roadblock is McConnell and the Senate R's, not Pelosi. The D's passed their version in mid-May. For fuck sakes that was 5 months ago. The white house didn't start serious negotiating till mid-late September, and during negotiations, trump cancelled the talks. And the Senate hasn't had a single hearing on the House proposal, but instead has just started putting together a bill less than 1/3rd the amount of what the House and the white house are negotiating

    but yeah, this is all on Pelosi
     
  10. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,276
    Likes Received:
    7,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
  11. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    25,753
    Likes Received:
    10,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wait a minute, back up... and reread the thread we're discussing...we're talking about 2 entirely different things.

    And "I agree Pelosi was snarky and defensive". Was all you had to say.

    ... how Pelosi is/was handling the stimulus deal was never part of the discussion until you made it one...the ONLY thing that I referenced was how she behaved when asked valid and simple questions, period.

    ...and yes, the rude and condescending manner in which she responded to simple questions was "all on Pelosi". She could have easily answered Blitzer's queries in a civilized manner but instead, she flew off the handle. Like I said earlier, I'm no fan of hers, but I've never seen her behave that way.

    ...again, Blitzer, though I think he's a joke, was polite while Pelosi was not. How the stimulus package is being handled is a different topic and I agree that it has been botched badly.
     
  12. wizenheimer

    wizenheimer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,638
    Likes Received:
    11,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    fair enough

    but IMO here's where the departure is and it's some reason for why Pelosi slammed Blitzer for not knowing the process of the negotiation. Pelosi was talking to the white house, Mnuchin, and in order to make a deal she and the D's would have to make substantive concessions. That's certain, especially judging by the first stimulus.

    but that wouldn't be the end of it: she and the D's would then have to make another set of concessions to the Senate R's and going by what McConnell is saying and doing, that round of concessions would be massive. And it seems apparent that the Senate won't be following any playbook out of the white house. Why would Pelosi agree to the first round of concessions without knowing what the 2nd round of concessions would have to be? Right now, the ball is in the senate's court. They need to come up with their own bill so the D's can begin to see if the gap is even bridgeable. My guess is it won't be unless the D's are desperate for a deal, and they shouldn't be if their priorities are gutted
     
  13. kjironman1

    kjironman1 The big dog around here.

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    14,395
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ironworker
    Location:
    Portland
    GoBlazersGo likes this.
  14. GoBlazersGo

    GoBlazersGo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,336
    Likes Received:
    1,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    kjironman1 likes this.
  15. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,276
    Likes Received:
    7,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
  16. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    25,753
    Likes Received:
    10,182
    Trophy Points:
    113

    As you said, "fair enough"... personally, I think McConnell and Pelosi both need to go away, just way too much bias and hatred and as I've said before "they can't agree on the color of shit".

    There really needs to be "term limits" in the House and Senate...and while we're at it, SC appointees as well. No offense to older folks (because I are one) but why do we allow these people who are in their 80's to decide policy and law? ...No, it's time for some "new blood".
     
    GoBlazersGo likes this.
  17. BigGameDamian

    BigGameDamian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,276
    Likes Received:
    7,077
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Can't wait to see how this goes!

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...ation-unveils-cvs-walgreens-vaccine-deal.html

    Trump administration announces deal with CVS and Walgreens to administer coronavirus vaccine to seniors in long-term care

    KEY POINTS
    • The Department of Health and Human Services on Friday announced a deal with CVS Health and Walgreens to administer coronavirus vaccines to the elderly and staff in long-term care facilities.
    • The vaccine will be free, and CVS and Walgreens will schedule and coordinate on-site clinic dates directly with each facility, HHS said.
    • The announcement comes the same day states must submit their draft plans to the federal government on how they will distribute a coronavirus vaccine if and when one is approved for public use.

     
  18. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    25,753
    Likes Received:
    10,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hey, he's gotta figure out a way to pay back that $400 Mil he owes somehow.
     
    kjironman1 likes this.
  19. kjironman1

    kjironman1 The big dog around here.

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    14,395
    Likes Received:
    14,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ironworker
    Location:
    Portland
    A mod need to change that title to "Over 220,000 and still counting"
     
  20. HailBlazers

    HailBlazers RIPcity

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    14,404
    Likes Received:
    9,272
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    PDX
     
    kjironman1 and SlyPokerDog like this.

Share This Page