AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11986
May 26th, 2020 at 7:43:13 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

I would take the living homeless over a chance of dying

See after being homeless here I am still able to talk about it. Can't talk after I am dead.

BTW, you could try something called welfare. At least apply before going homeless. Food stamps, etc



You have talked about your homeless period before, IIRC much of it was crashing on friend's couches. What I am talking about is living on the street. Living in shelter made of boxes. Having nowhere to go. Plus you were homeless as you were surrounded by plenty. In a depression there is no plenty, you have to struggle to survive.

Welfare? Yeah, as a single male with no dependents go try to apply. See how that works out for you. In total you might get a few hundred bucks a month.

And all because you are afraid of a CHANCE of catching it.

Me, I will take my chances. Most people will.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 174
  • Posts: 9725
May 26th, 2020 at 8:02:47 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

NOT EVEN CLOSE. If we banned cigarettes and made it a REQUIREMENT that you licked COVID-19 laden countertops, death rates would plummet.

AZ, you will not be able to convince the 'every human life is precious' group that destroying the economy is not worth a single life. They believe that that single life is worth the millions unemployed.

The fact that they are not out picketing bars serving alcohol, speed limits being too high, swimming pools being allowed, just shows that they are hypocrites.

People just are not capable of doing a proper risk/benefit analysis, and you will not be able to convince those people of anything.

"If you open up more people will die" will ALWAYS be true. Whether it is today, next week, next month, or next year.



Utter nonsense. I'd ask you to cite a single example of your statements, but we know you can't. Why insult everyone who agrees with science by calling us hypocrites?
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 237
  • Posts: 7249
May 26th, 2020 at 8:04:09 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

You have talked about your homeless period before, IIRC much of it was crashing on friend's couches. What I am talking about is living on the street. Living in shelter made of boxes. Having nowhere to go. Plus you were homeless as you were surrounded by plenty. In a depression there is no plenty, you have to struggle to survive.

Welfare? Yeah, as a single male with no dependents go try to apply. See how that works out for you. In total you might get a few hundred bucks a month.

And all because you are afraid of a CHANCE of catching it.

Me, I will take my chances. Most people will.



I was on the street sleeping for about two of the seven years homeless.

A few hundred bucks a month when homeless will last you really well even in NYC
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 108
  • Posts: 6973
Thanks for this post from:
SanchoPanza
May 26th, 2020 at 1:06:41 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Utter nonsense. I'd ask you to cite a single example of your statements, but we know you can't. Why insult everyone who agrees with science by calling us hypocrites?



I agree with 'science' more than you ever will. My entire life was surrounded by 'science'. I understand the 'science' of opening things up WILL cause more deaths due to COVID-19 than if we NEVER open things up. You and I agree on that 'science', right? I just understand that there are so many ways to die that we just don't do much to prevent. The easiest being cigarette use. 400,000 US deaths a year are attributed to cigarettes, is that a single example for you? I believe it is better for society now to 'open things up' to a large degree, even though I know it will cause more deaths than would happen if we did not open things up now. We are not arguing over science. We are arguing over what to do with the information that the science yields.

I think it is laughable that people are so concerned about Trump wearing a mask, not wearing a mask, taking a useless medicine or not taking a useless medicine. He is President of The United States of America. BY FAR, the greatest risk to his life is via assassination. 4 of 45 have perished that way. No one suggests that our President just stay in a basement Biden style. It is a risk Trump, and before him Obama, and before him Bush, all chose to take. If you use the same science you want to close the USA, then our President would never be allowed in public.

I'll apologize for the hypocrite comment.
michael99000
michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2112
May 26th, 2020 at 1:58:24 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

I agree with 'science' more than you ever will. My entire life was surrounded by 'science'. I understand the 'science' of opening things up WILL cause more deaths due to COVID-19 than if we NEVER open things up. You and I agree on that 'science', right? I just understand that there are so many ways to die that we just don't do much to prevent. The easiest being cigarette use. 400,000 US deaths a year are attributed to cigarettes, is that a single example for you? I believe it is better for society now to 'open things up' to a large degree, even though I know it will cause more deaths than would happen if we did not open things up now. We are not arguing over science. We are arguing over what to do with the information that the science yields.

I think it is laughable that people are so concerned about Trump wearing a mask, not wearing a mask, taking a useless medicine or not taking a useless medicine. He is President of The United States of America. BY FAR, the greatest risk to his life is via assassination. 4 of 45 have perished that way. No one suggests that our President just stay in a basement Biden style. It is a risk Trump, and before him Obama, and before him Bush, all chose to take. If you use the same science you want to close the USA, then our President would never be allowed in public.

I'll apologize for the hypocrite comment.



The difference between all your smoking and car accident examples vs this virus is , we already know how many people will die from those causes. So in weighing the risk vs reward, we know both values and can make a decision.

100k dead in three months (during a nationwide lockdown). How do you know how many will die in the next 3 months ? Will it be another 100,000.. will it be just 30,000... will the lack of preventative measure means itís 200,000 more? You have no idea yet Somehow youíre able to say this is worth the risk and thatís worth the risk. Tell me what the risk is. How many people have to die from the virus between June 1 and August 31st for you to say you were wrong ? There has to be a number of deaths that would lead you to say ďok we shouldínt have rushed .. Or what if a few of your family members and close friends catch it from a waiter or a barber and they die, would that change your mind ? Or would you say it was a worthy sacrifice to get this economy going sooner ?
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
Joined: May 10, 2010
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3472
May 26th, 2020 at 2:32:50 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

100k dead in three months (during a nationwide lockdown). How do you know how many will die in the next 3 months ? Will it be another 100,000.. will it be just 30,000... will the lack of preventative measure means itís 200,000 more? You have no idea yet

What has "science" shown in the last four months, when we have not learned the basics of the coronavirus like its origins, its vulnerability and its transmission.
ams288
ams288
Joined: Sep 26, 2012
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 5405
Thanks for this post from:
tringlomane
May 26th, 2020 at 2:44:27 PM permalink
Gov. Sisolak holding a press conference at 5:30 tonight. Hopefully he will announce the June 4th reopening date for casinos.

I have a trip booked for the MGM Grand for June 20th. Will definitely do a trip report if it happens.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 108
  • Posts: 6973
May 26th, 2020 at 5:16:13 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

The difference between all your smoking and car accident examples vs this virus is , we already know how many people will die from those causes. So in weighing the risk vs reward, we know both values and can make a decision.

100k dead in three months (during a nationwide lockdown). How do you know how many will die in the next 3 months ? Will it be another 100,000.. will it be just 30,000... will the lack of preventative measure means itís 200,000 more? You have no idea yet Somehow youíre able to say this is worth the risk and thatís worth the risk. Tell me what the risk is. How many people have to die from the virus between June 1 and August 31st for you to say you were wrong ? There has to be a number of deaths that would lead you to say ďok we shouldínt have rushed .. Or what if a few of your family members and close friends catch it from a waiter or a barber and they die, would that change your mind ? Or would you say it was a worthy sacrifice to get this economy going sooner ?



Good questions. I'll remind everyone that the politicians started out by closing things down to 'flatten the curve'. I wholeheartedly agreed with the tactic then. We needed to have enough PPE to protect first responders, doctors, etc... We needed to have enough ventilators, ICU beds, hospital beds to handle the sick and dying. We have done that successfully. Unless I am mis-informed, there is no locale within the USA that lacks for PPE or hospital resources now.

I can not give an exact number of how many deaths between July 1 and August 31 would be acceptable. First of all, you should have asked the question as how many 'additional' deaths would be acceptable. With the full lockdown there were no shortage of deaths. None of my relatives or friends are being required to go to a barber. I have a very good friend who almost died from COVID-19. My sister and her entire family had COVID-19 (mild). Yes, I will be sad if a loved one dies, but I truly believe that each individual will be able to decide on their own level of risk. I may be that loved one who dies.

You say "would you say it was a worthy sacrifice to get this economy going sooner?" You do realize, that WHATEVER date we open up, there will be more deaths than if we waited another week? So I'll reverse the question and ask you, how many additional deaths are acceptable to you? If i told you that 10 extra people will die if we open it up on June 1 instead of June 2, what do you decide?
ChumpChange
ChumpChange 
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 1386
May 26th, 2020 at 5:55:56 PM permalink
One person can infect hundreds of people in one night then those hundreds can infect thousands the next day, then those thousands can infect tens of thousands the next day, and so on, until 2 weeks later all of Las Vegas calls in sick to death and everything shuts down on a dime, including the hospitals.
michael99000
michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2112
May 26th, 2020 at 6:06:04 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

If i told you that 10 extra people will die if we open it up on June 1 instead of June 2, what do you decide?



I guess it depends from what standpoint we look at these questions..

If Im totally neutral and I donít know any of the additional 10 people who died, and I also donít personally know anyone whose business benefited from the extra open day, then Iíd prefer to save those 10 people and open a day later.

The point I was making in my original reply was itís very easy to say letís open up!!.. and play fast and loose with the tens of thousands of lives it may cost , when itís a bunch of strangers who your stance puts in jeopardy. Yet if you knew opening up now would cause just One of your immediate family members to die (who otherwise wouldíve survived), I bet your stance would change quickly.

  • Jump to: