Quoner

But if a tree falls in the forest....does it get 0 replies?

I enjoyed googling who that was. If you've ever seen the official twitter of the liberty fireman before he got called out of it, it's a mess of RTs and fandom of her and her ilk. Glad you could participate here, though. This thread was missing your trademark brand of non-substantive post count meter running horseshit. You'd been quieter, so were worried you were somehow learning self-awareness and the value of not commenting in every thread. I mean, if anyone was going to appreciate keeping the board on topic, I figured it would be the guy who whines about it constantly, but I guess you've sold out?

Someone mentioned the potential home of a presidential library and you went all in on politics. The word Trump on its own is not a green light to post whatever headline you saw Laura Ingraham share on twitter.

Yup. And the dumbasses that fought tooth and nail to oppose that for a century were even in the news today. Ain't history grand and full of lessons? https://www.businessinsider.com/when-americans-went-to-war-against-seat-belts-2020-5

Mine went up $15,000 and I submitted the protest online over the weekend. I have a realtor friend who pulls the comps so it is not a huge hassle, but, having lived in a nice town in a state with its own income tax, I paid less overall out of pocket up there by about $1500 per year.

If seatbelts work, why do we need airbags? If airbags work, why do we need seatbelts?

/Prepares to fight tax appraisal for the 4th year in a row HELL YEAH, TEXAS!

Whoa whoa whoa... I think you owe Lifer an apology. He's been very open with his medical credentials and front line expertise and I refuse to believe that he's been doing something as tangential as this the whole time.

"The economy is fundamentally broken for most people but also insanely good as is" is a powerful mission statement.

100% agreement here.

That's great. Was it a phase 1, phase 2 or phase 3 trial? Have they followed the lengthy approval process for a typical drug? Do you have any idea how many trails and tests go into this stuff? Is this a space you're remotely familiar with or hastily studying to win a political argument that shouldn't exist because people decided to tout this drug as a solution prematurely? It is okay not to know stuff, but it can be pretty dangerous to think you know stuff you don't, which is why the president is getting blowback. Also, two important points below from the write up. These are both great and useful peaces of information for certain groups, but the authors go on to recommend a host of additional research and even mention politicians making speeches like this is settled. I love that a call for patience and caution is such a snowflake trigger for the people who treat this like my team vs. your team the hardest. Science really doesn't care who you vote for. So slap a minus one extra hard and find more context-free links from Laura Ingraham and the gang, because it's 54 page thread or bust, baby. In the meantime, at least we all share the common goal of wanting the best cures and as many options for treatment as possible.

Besides someone using the word political and you clapping like a seal, what's the actual issue? Is 150 studies not enough? Did you have a certain number of trials in mind? Are you upset the trials are happening and think this is settled? Just trying to understand. Who's arguing against learning more and using everything we find?

The idiotic idea that this new study was hastily fashioned together to somehow own the president is the most absurd part. There are constant studies done in parallel like this all the time. The goal is to create an accurate and full picture across a spectrum - not provide the aha moment that shuts down the conversation. Watching the same three people tout random supporting anecdotes while dumping on the scientific method is comical, but the driving force behind is also the reason there's so many idiots rushing to share Plandemic on Facebook (and that's the danger of "just asking questions" and indulging both sides equally in all discussions. You become completely vulnerable to propaganda if you give all your sources equal weight.)

Wow, you're sitting on a real scoop (UV light kills the virus on surfaces) that no one knew until published research in 2018.... well before Trump "sarcastically" jumbled his own briefing about it? https://news.yahoo.com/ultraviolet-light-can-be-used-against-coronavirus-just-not-in-the-way-trump-imagines-090000567.html So, we have yet another FFR bombshell that just underlies a misunderstanding of previous news or willful ignorance? Color me shocked.

Two different arguments seem to have broken out. This is a reasonable point and one that I think everyone agrees with. @El Paso Eagle also made a great point about how we typically aren't in the weeds on medical trials or have any real expertise in this area. The tiny barrage of small anecdotes being conclusive followed by "this definitely works always and we need more" is what is causing disagreement. A couple of folks speaking in absolutes around main ideas like HCQ fixes this and overall minimization of the whole situation is what is generating the passionate responses. Also, would be interesting to see the original question of the thread covering if people have actually had experiences with family or friends getting this illness. It's a lot easier to argue something that isn't real to you or only feels like an economic burden if you're still sheltered from it entirely.

Ok? When did we start rooting for some drugs over others? The weird, somehow partisan stance that HQnC (congrats on the abbreviation - it's hard to spell!) is the infallible solution while science is still verifying almost every aspect of this is the point here. I'm not seeing a single article that calls Remdesivir a sure fire cure like a handful of folks are doing with HQC, just discussion about a drug showing some initial positive results with a lot more to prove. There's so much we don't know about both. Also, fun that you're dipping a toe in the fire Fauci waters and invoking the new Bill Gates boogeyman threat to see how it feels. It's like conservative twitter on severe tape delay, but a person! But, we've digressed from the Rick Bright thing without any acknowledgement, so your ability to pivot wildly continues to be an invaluable asset. You're elusive, like the Barry Sanders of debate, constantly dashing toward the wrong end zone for a safety, breaking teammates ankles all the way down the field as they try in horror to prevent the inevitable.

-Rick Dull -Rick Bright

Another good article with something for everyone: https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2020/05/tara-reade-joe-biden-metoo-essentialism/611116/. It has criticism of that no good mainstream media, our expectations of media to wrap things up quickly, some explanation as to why this has been covered the way it has (although it leaves out a possible point that Kavanaugh was also handled differently because a clock was legit ticking down on confirmation as its backdrop while the media has time to vet claims against Biden), why a slow burn is not necessarily a bad thing and some thoughts on what "Me Too" does and doesn't mean (especially in context of how some conservatives are gleefully brandishing the phrases in light of a potential rape.) I hope Tara Reade is heard and this is fully vetted and it is funny to see the constant refrain of that come across consistently from multiple LIB posters while the Lifers of the world keep yelling that no one on that mythical other side wants to see an investigation. She may be lying. She may be telling the truth. It may be somewhere in the middle. Let's find out and act accordingly! We would also love investigations free of legal manipulations into the 20+ allegations against Trump and maybe more than two weeks to vet Cavanaugh impartially. Didn't the Dems successfully self manage the end of Al Franken's career a couple of years ago? I've also yet to see a Biden fan enter the chat, so maybe drop the whole "YOUR CANDIDATE" thing, too. As far as I know, GMG doesn't have a Delaware contingent, so I don't think anyone here has ever voted Joe as a topline option in any election. Anyway, would love some feedback from folks who read the article. It's long, but in the words of a great (medical/scholarly?) doctor I'm privileged to know, "Reading comprehension. Study it, buddy."

How a non-political issue becomes almost solely political, volume 34343423848: https://www.axios.com/axios-ipsos-coronavirus-week-8-5a1947d5-9850-4e58-9583-9b617e6fdc1b.html (also, Axios is a great resource in general and have great daily newsletter for a range of markets/issues - as well as a great sports one that is well thought out and broadly sourced.)

It is a sickeningly small sample size for an event at that point we had nearly 3 months to prepare for. Lack of testing is a big part of why there is still so much we don't know.

Good advice - even almost a month ago. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-and-covid-19-younger-adults-are-at-risk-too And, since Rick, loves his science, here's a look at the vitamin D conversation. Rick, can I borrow the log-in I am sure you have to read this full article? In the meantime, here's what scientists are saying about the same data: https://www.sciencealert.com/covid-deaths-are-being-linked-with-vitamin-d-deficiency-here-s-what-that-means

Gonna answer the simple question or just pretend you're part of the GMG SVU some more? And a quick skim of GMG finds you struggling to understand how the NFL draft works, the fundamentals of basketball scheduling (tried to help ya!) and what a shooter is, so maybe learn more about sports before you ask everyone else to stick to it on your terms?

I'm not really that young, but I am under 50, which seems to be the cutoff line. And, this is actually pretty easy. The generation above you fought in WW2 and is typically known as the greatest generation. Before them, came a Great Depression, a first world war, and the industrial revolution (going to make an assumption and assume we can cut off some things at the existence of electricity, cars, refrigeration, etc.) Post WW2 to the 1970s was a pretty non-disputed economic boom and then the 70s saw some reckoning and a downturn, and the response was deregulation and the failed ideas of trickle down. Basically, pull up the ladder behind you and kick the can. Someone born in the early 80s has spent their lives feeling the aftershocks of those decisions and we have seen wage levels stagnate for 30 years now. The idea of kicking the can, making sure you keep yours and pretending that the rich give a shit about a shrinking middle class has somehow become a core value for people who will never make more than a quarter of a million dollars annually in their household. For some reason, you all really, really want to crap on Millennials to feel better about other problems and it is baffling when you raised them. It's like screaming at a mirror of your worst collective habits. That said, care to answer why Biden and Trump can't have fully transparent accountability for their accusations or are we gonna pivot to economic theory next to avoid a simple question?