ColoradoEagle

FDA issues warnings on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine after ‘serious poisoning and death’ reported https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/fda-issues-warnings-on-chloroquine-and-hydroxychloroquine-after-serious-poisoning-and-death-reported.html Just in case anyone is still consulting Dr. Trump.

Further reading: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/04/hospitals-face-a-white-house-blockade-for-coronavirus-ppe.html Just as a disclaimer, this story is opinionated. However, several governors have complained about having to compete with the federal government for supplies.

I'm less than two minutes into the video and Fauci is saying, "a really, very gradual step-by-step ... where you have to fill certain criteria before you go to phase 1. I don't have time to watch the entire video right now, but I'm not seeing anything saying "open all the doors!" similar to Kemp in Georgia. Because car accidents, cancer, and morbid obesity are not highly contagious.

Medical experts say that opening up the country too early will result in overloading the healthcare system. And it's not "people may die", people will die. So far almost 50,000 Americans have died.

The debates will be interesting.

Says someone who's married to a person with an auto immune disease. Elective surgeries have resumed. I understand the economic realities, and wish that Congress would do more to address the "little people" instead of working to make their rich friends richer with these stimulus bills.

It's really not. Although curling up in the fetal position is optional.

I try not to 'both sides' things, because it's almost always disingenuous. You can't present equal time and consideration in an argument to one side that promotes eating babies, and the other side that says it's wrong. Not saying any person or party is advocating that particular position, before anyone loses their shit. Just a hypothetical argument where you would say, "this position clearly has no merit" and it shouldn't be boosted as a legitimate viewpoint. Legitimate debate and arguments are engaging and enlightening. Ones where people come in with talking points, bad faith, and animosity don't contribute anything to anyone.

This isn’t really about the virus. Is it rooted in some truth? Sure. But it’s noise. It’s not going to get Trump to add more diversity in his hiring process. Knowing what we know now, it’s also one of the least important questions that could’ve been asked at the time. When I think about this situation being politicized, going back to what @greenminer posted, you’ve literally got one political affiliation that trusts and believes in what comes out of the medical community and science. You’ve got another political affiliation where, by and large, unless it comes from Trump or Fox News, it’s ‘fake news’. That’s why I’m interested in your examples, because while there are plenty of examples of opinion and bias driven media, it’s rare that I see anything coming from the center or left on the virus that isn’t rooted in some amount of research and expert opinion, even if the end conclusion is questionable or debatable. From the right I see a lot of ‘gut feelings’ that don’t really make much sense and seems to be contributing to the politicization we’ve seen the past couple weeks.

I know I’m going down a rabbit hole here, but what, in your opinion, has the media done to politicize this?

South Korea just went through an election that was a landslide win for Democrats. https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Three-reasons-for-Moon-s-landslide-in-South-Korea-s-elections

Got it. My point was more towards the ends of a better outcome was/is most definitely possible given that other countries with similar resources (South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, Australia, etc) have had far fewer deaths per million than we have had. As I said in my post just after this one, I feel like we've seen a tremendous response from a vast majority of state and local governments. I know my opinion of Betsy Price did a 180 after this. It's the Federal response that I, and many others, believe is lacking. And thanks for posting the methodology for the chart. My inner-statistics nerd needed that.

This is a lot to unpack. People say that Trump didn't shutdown Travel soon enough His decision to stop travel into the states from China wasn't bad. It wasn't early enough to stop the virus from coming in, and as others have said, they're currently saying it may have come mostly from Europe anyway. I don't really think there could have been a soon enough for something like this, so it's not really something that even enters my mind. The part that was missing from the travel restrictions was to get TSA/CBP into PPE and start taking the temperatures of people entering and looking for/asking about symptoms, similar to Taiwan. People say that Trump didn't shutdown states/social stuff early enough Not within his authority, but he also made no recommendations to states that I can recall (correct me if I'm wrong) other than social distancing and limiting headcount at gatherings. All the shutdowns and shelter in place orders came from state and local governments. What about before Super Tuesday (March 3rd)? I think a great response would have been to issue shelter in place recommendations before Super Tuesday. However, the first SIP order in the country didn't come until March 16th (effective 3/17) for the Bay Area of California. So while it would've been great if this were in place, without knowing the entirety of briefings and conversations behind the scenes, it's hard to tell whether even the first order in CA was late because of no Federal direction, or if it was more aggressive than the oval office would have been, regardless of who's sitting in it. What about the primaries? I think states could delay similar to what we've seen from other states. That doesn't stop Conservative leaning state governments and judges from overriding, however, and continuing as if we were in normal times. Something that blew up in their faces in spectacular fashion in Wisconsin. Conclusion This shouldn't be a political conversation. Democrat and Republican governors are saying the Federal response is poor. A Nobel prize winning economist is saying the response is poor. Hell, Piers freaking Morgan is saying the response is poor. At some point, you have to stop rooting for your team and root for what's best for the country. Right now, science and medicine is what's best for the country. When you're taking medical advice from Trump (hydroxychloroquine), pushing to reopen the economy despite health warnings all because of a bunch of astroturfed tiny protests and political memes, and thinking that every hospital, Mayor, and governor is "out to get Trump!"...well, you (general you, not calling out THOR) need a f'n reality check.

I'd be interested in the context of the chart. When taking data from worldometers.info which seems to be doing a decent job so far updating their numbers, the US is: #1 in total cases #16 in cases per million (if counting all countries) #7 in cases per million if you don't count countries with less than 1m population #1 in total deaths #16 in deaths per million (if counting all countries) #11 in deaths per million of you don't count countries with less than 1m population #43 in tests per million All of this is out of a total of 205 countries. As of today, the only major countries we're having less deaths per million than are: Belgium, Spain, Italy, France, UK, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ireland. So if you're saying we're doing better than some other really hard hit nations? That's true. If you're saying that there are nations that are hit harder than us, so we're doing an ok or good job? That's a leap. It's especially a leap if you're trying to credit the federal response to that when up to this point it's been 90% governors, mayors, and (in the case of Texas) county judges taking the world on their shoulders as far as the government is involved.

Well, it is an honest question when we can compare the reaction and planning of the US government to several other first world nations that saw nowhere near the case and death count per million that we're seeing. Even if it was a 'gotcha' question, which it absolutely is not, a lucid leader would reflect on the missteps that have been made up to that point, what can be corrected and what cannot, and what the plan is going forward. When the answer to everything is, "You wouldn't believe how fast/prepared/amazing we've been at responding to this," but the facts tell a different story, then you have to ask yourself whether you believe someone trying to cover their ass, or the dead bodies piling up every day. That's why he spends 90% of his "briefings" throwing blame at anyone he can think of: Obama, governors, Hillary Clinton, Democrats in Congress, etc. Even he knows this is not a good situation and is hurting his re-election chances, about the only thing he really does care deeply about.

Still a Straw Man. C&TV asked: To which you responded: Did China annex Europe? And then you take the argument that no one is making and basically paint 50-60% of the country as being hypocritical. Fancy.

Yeah, that's just deflection. A platitude to make people feel like it was an honest mistake. "We totally didn't mean for that to happen! Well, maybe they'll give it back out of the goodness of their hearts." It was absolutely meant to happen, otherwise the language wouldn't be in the bill. It wasn't a mistake, or "whoops, we forgot to exclude corporations." It was the intent to fund corporations under the guise of helping small businesses. And no company is going to let go of free money unless they're dragged through the media like Shake Shack was. Even then, most companies would go the Ruth's Chris route and either hope people forget or rely on the hope that their customers don't care.

Not sure why people are downvoting. This is a well thought out point. Any taxes on wealthier Americans would need to be on a perpetual basis and would take a while (months to years) to produce any appreciable amount.

His promise was for 1/3rd of his wealth. And I would expect the "some of us need to die so the economy can go on" message to gain way more traction than "a few of us need to donate a small portion of our extreme wealth to help the country."

Conservatives, come get your boy...

Well, I'd be surprised at how dumb the conclusion of the article was if I didn't know the author. Taiwan had a swift, methodical response where accurate information was disseminated regularly and efficient measures were taken with a singular message from the top down. The facts that they took the threat seriously, coordinated a national and local response, and continue to prepare for the worst is why they've accomplished what they have. It has absolutely nothing to do with "freedom".

I know I don't have to tell you, but this was by design. A certain side of the aisle really insisted that even if a company employs tens of thousands of people, each location that employs less than 500 people should be considered its own 'small business'. So here we are with big business/banks getting nearly all of the bailout without any consequences, same as in 2008.

Most activities/events will be on some sort of pause or very slow ramp up until there's a vaccine. College sports will suffer more than pro sports, because there are way more regulations and schools have been spending money as fast (or faster) than they earn it for a while now. No way to tell if interest wanes. I wouldn't think so, but at the same time, MLB never fully recovered from the strike in the 90s.

Week 567 for me... Watched Castlevania season 3, Altered Carbon season 2, and Tiger King recently. Just started season 2 of Kingdom. Oh, and Spenser Confidential was good in a Mark Wahlberg kinda way.