Coronavirus Hysteria

[Philip J. Fry]

PBS Newshour is non-partisan and funded by donors and tax-payer dollars. In this interview, science journalist Laurie Garrett confirms that those affected by COVID are of lower income and black. Garrett predicts more deaths in the South and Mississippi river area, mostly in rural communities, where access to healthcare is limited. She also made a good point, that public health was not something America invested in. Maybe public opinion will change after COVID.

 

[WinMore]

Higher % of African-Americans have lower income.
African-Americans usually live in more crowded places.
Apparently, %-wise, African-Americans in America have a higher obesity rate.
<== All risk factors.

Has nothing to do with racism.
I agree that people at risk should NOT be neglected.
Luckily hospitals are not being overrun.

Agreed that America is one of the first world countries that end up at the lower end of healthcare investment.

I also think that the economic damage is starting to reach a point that is indefensible.

This chart says it all I think.

 

[eliquid]

Starbucks is open again.

So you know everything is fine and dandy. They wouldn't have opened if there was a real problem.

 

[Philip J. Fry]

Higher % of African-Americans have lower income.
African-Americans usually live in more crowded places.
Apparently, %-wise, African-Americans in America have a higher obesity rate.
<== All risk factors.

Has nothing to do with racism.
I agree that people at risk should NOT be neglected.
Luckily hospitals are not being overrun.

It doesn't mean that it's not racism either. We agree that blacks are suffering and that they shouldn't be neglected; but a white supremacist would argue that blacks deserve to suffer, because of their race. When it is that, it is racism. How could we tell if a policy that mostly negatively affects African Americans is racist or not? Sure, for slavery, that's quite obviously racist. For segregation, that's racist too. What about the war on drugs? Was that racist? What about how the nation handles COVID-19? Would this be racist too?

Then, there's the question of white ignorance. Instead of claiming that blacks deserve to suffer, white ignorance is claiming that there's no such thing as racism. It prevents the discussion from happening, which also prevents the racism from being addressed, which prolongs the racism.

You list that African Americans have higher obesity rates, lower income, and live in crowded places. The racism might not be how COVID-19 funds, tests, and resources are handled but the conditions that lead to African Americans to have those conditions in the first place. They were shipped from Africa to be slaves. They were uneducated and used as labor. They were freed and moved to cities to work as uneducated laborers. They were poor and ate unhealthy, due to their lack of education; and, now, their deaths are due to those pre-existing conditions, which wouldn't be counted as racism but simply as pre-existing risk factors? How is that not racism? What caused African American communities to be so poor, obese, and in high population density places in the first place?

 

[Marko]

"Most will not allow customers inside, with customers picking up their orders at the door or by drive-thru."

So it's not that Starbucks is open again, a different version of starbucks is open.

Starbucks is open again.

So you know everything is fine and dandy. They wouldn't have opened if there was a real problem.

 

[eliquid]

"Most will not allow customers inside, with customers picking up their orders at the door or by drive-thru."

So it's not that Starbucks is open again, a different version of starbucks is open.

Yeah, the drive thru is open.

Whereas all of April, the drive thru and pick up was shut down. As in the entire store was perm closed because of an internal company petition by the baristas. So Starbucks entirely shut down all of April most of the USA.

Now they have the drive thru's open again.

If they can do that, there is nothing they are afraid of anymore considering the drive thrus were closed before.

You list that African Americans have higher obesity rates, lower income, and live in crowded places. The racism might not be how COVID-19 funds, tests, and resources are handled but the conditions that lead to African Americans to have those conditions in the first place. They were shipped from Africa to be slaves. They were uneducated and used as labor. They were freed and moved to cities to work as uneducated laborers. They were poor and ate unhealthy, due to their lack of education; and, now, their deaths are due to those pre-existing conditions, which wouldn't be counted as racism but simply as pre-existing risk factors? How is that not racism? What caused African American communities to be so poor, obese, and in high population density places in the first place?

How do you explain all the uneducated Irish and Italians that immigrated who were also cheap uneducated labor and faced racism as well? They were poor and ate unhealthy and uneducated, yet they are not represented in this model. If racism, poor health, cheap labor, and lack of education did not hinder Irish and Italians all these years later, what is the difference in this for African Americans?

Maybe you would like to say, "they looked white, so they got it easier as history passed".

Ok.

What about Asians? Specifically the Chinese.

Hugely used as cheap labor in American history. Chinese immigrants were used as cheap labor who were uneducated and faced lots of racism. They even had racist slang names like "coolies" and Chinese women were all considered prostitutes. Why are they not in this model?

If being uneducated, poor, and a victim of racism all count to issues like you mention, why are we not doing something for Chinese, Irish and Italians? Are they also in poor communities, obese, and in high population density places? If not, why not?

What is different about them as they encountered the same background when it comes to racism, education, cheap labor, etc. Why is their outcome decades later not the same?

Wouldn't their "pre-existing conditions" make them a target for COVID-19 too?

As someone with one of these backgrounds, I'm really interested in knowing.

.

 

[Philip J. Fry]

How do you explain all the uneducated Irish and Italians that immigrated who were also cheap uneducated labor and faced racism as well? They were poor and ate unhealthy and uneducated, yet they are not represented in this model. If racism, poor health, cheap labor, and lack of education did not hinder Irish and Italians all these years later, what is the difference in this for African Americans?

Maybe you would like to say, "they looked white, so they got it easier as history passed".

Ok.

What about Asians? Specifically the Chinese.

Hugely used as cheap labor in American history. Chinese immigrants were used as cheap labor who were uneducated and faced lots of racism. They even had racist slang names like "coolies" and Chinese women were all considered prostitutes. Why are they not in this model?

If being uneducated, poor, and a victim of racism all count to issues like you mention, why are we not doing something for Chinese, Irish and Italians? Are they also in poor communities, obese, and in high population density places? If not, why not?

What is different about them as they encountered the same background when it comes to racism, education, cheap labor, etc. Why is their outcome decades later not the same?

Wouldn't their "pre-existing conditions" make them a target for COVID-19 too?

As someone with one of these backgrounds, I'm really interested in knowing.

.

I never said "they looked white, so they got it easier as history passed" nor would I argue that position nor would my argument lead to that position. Stop putting words in my mouth.

First off, I dislike arguing with you because you're a bad interlocutor. You said "Not only do you not have any dignity what so ever... your parents couldn't teach you basic common sense or manners... What a failure for you. The lack of common sense is pretty astounding." I'm willing to overlook that out of epistemic duty. (And also to disprove your point).

It's obvious that you came from an underprivileged background. You might be angry, that you had to work so hard to get to where you are today; and it might feel unfair to give to other people, when they could just as well work hard to "make it" like you.

However, because you made it doesn't mean that other people can make it too.

Your question was addressed in the 70's by John Rawls in A Theory of Justice. In the book, he argues that a just society is a fair society. Here's a free copy of the book in case you'd like to read it. It's quite a fundamental work in politics and philosophy. It's similar to Freud and Gestalt for Psychology or E. Jerome McCarthy for Marketing. It's written at the grad school level; so, here's a video about Rawlsian Justice.

The video explains The Original Position and The Veil of Ignorance. It is a thought experiment. In The Original Position, people get to choose the society that they want to live in. They do not know the family, race, sex, and other factors of circumstantial luck. This is called the Veil of Ignorance. In this position, most people choose a fair society, one where a person's race or national origin doesn't matter. You'd agree with Rawls in this part, since you are arguing for justice for Italians and Irish (your profile photo is of a white guy).

Rawls defines fair with two principles:

• "First Principle: Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all;
• Second Principle: Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions:
  • They are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity;
  • They are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society."

The first principal basically states "everyone should have equal rights." "Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states." "Freedom" is a right. Rawls just used the word "liberties" which is the same thing as freedom. Being free from having to do something is having the right not to do it.

The second principal states "if there's inequality, social or economic, in society, the inequality should be in favor of the least advantaged."

So, to get back to your question, what about Italians, Irish, and Chinese? They're not disregarded at all, unless they're not disadvantaged. Disadvantaged doesn't mean just economically disadvantaged, it also includes socially disadvantaged, which includes knowledge.

You owe me an apology.

 

[WinMore]

When it comes to racism, I agree with Morgan Freeman

On topic:
I think the discussion about if it's a good idea to stop the quarantine is becoming irrelevant.
In my city people have been neglecting it for weeks (at least a decent amount).
If not 99% of the people follow the quarantine, there is little point. (Not sure about the actual percentage, but from what I'm seeing it's not even close to 80%).

From where I'm sitting it looks like the government will have no other option but to start everything up again in a few weeks.

 

[becool]

I think you're wrong, @Philip J. Fry.

First, the extent to which @eliquid is angry is irrelevant. Your point is a distraction, it's tangential and it's unfair for the purposes of your debate. Second, Rawls' A Theory of Justice, among many others in the political philosophy space, is a theoretical work involving a theoretical exercise. The book and the theories espoused therein involve a simulation that's virtually inapplicable to the real world. The work is genius, but it's theoretical to the point of absurdity. Moreover, the forced equality that Rawls and others envision, when applied to the real world, results in extreme inequality, totalitarianism, dictatorships and the like. You're talking about leveling the playing field by starting anew and eliminating the natural lottery, so to speak. Third, you haven't addressed @eliquid's points which aren't theoretical but are instead factual and objectively verifiable.

Having that said, I usually stay out of these conversations and probably won't contribute further.

 

[Philip J. Fry]

To everyone else reading this thread, is this the kind of person who should be an authority? Is this model behavior? Why should you listen to someone whose character is this?

eLiquid is a loud mouth idiot, who suffers from little man syndrome ("characterized by overly-aggressive or domineering social behavior, such as lying about earnings, and carries the implication that such behavior is compensatory for the subject's physical or social shortcomings"). His attacks against me are projections ("Psychological projection is a defense mechanism in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a bully may project their own feelings of vulnerability onto the target. It incorporates blame shifting and can manifest as shame dumping.").

He isn't talking about my childhood, he's talking about his own. I never mentioned my childhood on this forum. He's interpreting what he believes my childhood was, from his own childhood experience. He states right here that he had to pay for everything growing up, including a car and 2 years of college, while his brothers were given 5 cars each, had their college paid for, and had $30,000 in legal fees paid for.

When he said "It hurts so bad, that you and others like you think you need to be handed things to you instead of work to make it? We should just help you for no reason because someone in your early life didn't let you suck off the teet enough and now you can't "adult" properly?", he was referring to his own experience. He projecting his own feelings.

Just because eLiquid is bitter about his life experience doesn't mean that other people have to experience the same thing too. Welfare and free higher education would have helped him, but it seems that he can't get past his own personal experience to comprehend that.

What other experience does eLiquid have? He often posts his business opinions on this forum; but, beware! The situations that were in play for him might not be in play for you, if you execute his recommendations. What worked for him would not necessarily work for you.

He also never states his earnings. Is he rich or is he just acting, as if he's rich, for the perceived authority of being a business expert? Would a rich person be so hard pressed for money that they choose not to pay their quarterly Estimated Taxes, for a small return? If he had wealth, he could have just paid for his taxes from his savings but in this post, he argues how opting for a 3% fee from the IRS is a good decision, as he's able to use that capital for investments, which would pay off by tax day of next year. Is that good advice or wishful thinking? I'd argue that it is the latter.

It sounds like he's a poor man who doesn't have much capital. If he makes $100,000 a year and if his tax rate was 33%, his total tax bill would be $33,000. That's $8,250/quarter. He's arguing that it'll be better to not pay the $8,250/quarter in Estimated Taxes for a small return. Why doesn't he just use his wealth to pay his estimated taxes? Because he doesn't have any wealth! If he simply had 1 year worth of income saved up, it wouldn't be a problem to pay his quarterly Estimated Taxes.

He's no richer than you and I and he doesn't know anything.

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. eLiquid naked and afraid. He's a poor, uneducated fool who lacks social skills, class, and grace. He'll never be who his ego wishes he'd be. He'll always be bitter, angry, and upset, because that is his life.

Here's the big man himself:

To take us back on topic, this whole pandemic is caused by a virus. If we had test kits ready, the economy could open up sooner. Why don't we have enough test kids? It's because of the Trump administration's blunders. It's due to his denial of its severity of the virus, his refusal to cooperate with governors, and his total incompetence in government. Trump is another idiot, like this Trump backing fool.

If you're tired of the quarantine, you're ready to vote in someone else. The reason why the quarantine is so bad, is because of how Trump's handling it.

 

[Jared]

Blue States: NY, NJ, MA, PA, CA, MI, IL, LA, CT, MD
Population: 104.8 million
Cases: 834,813
Deaths: 55,701

Red States: TX, FL, OH, AZ, TN, IN, MO, SC, AL, OK
Population: 103.1 million
Cases: 163,663
Deaths: 6,689

The idea that all of America must stay in indefinite lock down because of the catastrophic failures of a dozen or so left-wing governments is absurd.

 

[WinMore]

Blue States: NY, NJ, MA, PA, CA, MI, IL, LA, CT, MD
Population: 104.8 million
Cases: 834,813
Deaths: 55,701

Red States: TX, FL, OH, AZ, TN, IN, MO, SC, AL, OK
Population: 103.1 million
Cases: 163,663
Deaths: 6,689

The idea that all of America must stay in indefinite lock down because of the catastrophic failures of a dozen or so left-wing governments is absurd.

About half of the USA states are missing here.
Just pointing out an easy counter-argument. (I don't disagree)

(I could argue that they have more young people on average, making the numbers even worse for the blue states...)

I do think more blue states happened to be less prepared. They also are the states that (mostly) have denser population.
They are also the states with the highest % of African-Americans.
Maybe going red would pay of better for the inhabitants of the state. Unfortunately there is no certain way to tell. I think quite a few people would consider taking the jump.

Having enough test-kits is a ridiculous notion. even today the experts aren't confident that the existing test kits are good enough. Besides, even if there happened to be 320 million test-kits tomorrow, would you force the whole population to be tested? I guarantee many will refuse.
Since the tests aren't foolproof, and there is no way to test everyone, and the incubation period is so long, AND a lot of people are ignoring states orders. And winning legal cases over it!!!
There is no way it can be stopped, and could be stopped in a country as big as the US.
(It could have been if China and WHO had been honest from the start. If the borders had been closed immediately. I bet Congress would not have approved that. Pelosi went to China town, to show that Trump was being racist.)

320 million test kits wouldn't even be enough. You need to keep testing every few days. While keeping the infection rate below 1.05 . It's not happening.

MAYBE if they take some completely totalitarian measures, but guess what? Then it will be "Orange man takes advantage of the situation and reveals he's a fascist".

Positive side for big government people, many old people will die and no longer rely on government benefits. More money to waste on Russian hoaxes! Hooray!

(For the people that don't get it: I'm not being serious, people dying is terrible)

 

[Stones]

 

[WinMore]

Regardless of what this means, it really does LOOK like China is the big benefactor of the crisis...
And this will convince many people it was intentional.

Every first world country is smacked by this.

 

[mj22]

Calm Down Killas, dont make me try to make @CCarter put you in time out in the corner. I have been in buso jail for less...haha

 

[BCN]

Blue States: NY, NJ, MA, PA, CA, MI, IL, LA, CT, MD
Population: 104.8 million
Cases: 834,813
Deaths: 55,701

Red States: TX, FL, OH, AZ, TN, IN, MO, SC, AL, OK
Population: 103.1 million
Cases: 163,663
Deaths: 6,689

The idea that all of America must stay in indefinite lock down because of the catastrophic failures of a dozen or so left-wing governments is absurd.

A bit cherry-picking of stats there.

This would only be valid if all states were taken into account, and we could assume that the reporting would be uniform (all cases in all states are either infected/not infected with the same criterion used). Even then there are other factors, like health care, wealth, education, and many more factors not corrected for.

It's the same if you want to optimize traffic for ROAS. Does a particular banner suck, or is the OS, website placement, time of day, or something else? Maybe one placement sends more traffic from older android phones, and shows a certain banner format which does not work? When we've bought traffic from tube sites for adult nutra products, we bid higher on websites getting more than xx% SEO traffic vs. popups and cheaper traffic. Someone else might start to cut banners because they don't see the whole picture.

You can't control for all this at scale, so you cut the placement - but it's not correct. You could also move them to a lower CPM campaign, and still bank. And for more important things in life, you can't make drastic assumptions that affect people's lives based on simplified stats that are wrong in the first place.

The same is true for the stats on ethnicity and Covid19 posted above, so it goes both ways.

GDP is also an absurd way of measuring the impact since it doesn't necessarily reflect the real growth of wealth for most people. A country like China with a lack of human rights, low wages, and very unequal wealth distribution, can't be compared to a country like Sweden or Germany. They can manufacture cheap, with an unlimited army of cheap work, of course, they will have high growth in GDP as long as they keep churning out product.

There are many interesting points of view. I.e. https://hbr.org/2019/10/gdp-is-not-a-measure-of-human-well-being

I'm not taking political sides, I guess I belong to neither side of the political spectrum in the US. I'm pro personal freedom, pro-education, pro-health-care, pro-guns, pro-business, pro-legalization, pro lean government, pro gay marriage ...

I'm just pointing out that you can make numbers say whatever you want if you just pick the right ones, and it's being abused in all forms of political debate, from "the gender gap" in wages, to racist lawmaking, and in subjects like this. You can probably make the stats say that people driving a certain brand of car have a 0.001% of being infected - but it doesn't make it true.

 

[WinMore]

A bit cherry-picking of stats there.

There are many interesting points of view. I.e. https://hbr.org/2019/10/gdp-is-not-a-measure-of-human-well-being

I'm not taking political sides, I guess I belong to neither side of the political spectrum in the US. I'm pro personal freedom, pro-education, pro-health-care, pro-guns, pro-business, pro-legalization, pro lean government, pro gay marriage ...

I'm just pointing out that you can make numbers say whatever you want if you just pick the right ones, and it's being abused in all forms of political debate, from "the gender gap" in wages, to racist lawmaking, and in subjects like this. You can probably make the stats say that people driving a certain brand of car have a 0.001% of being infected - but it doesn't make it true.

100% agree.
Could also be true, but irrelevant.

I know that me picture didn't prove anything. I meant to point out that pictures like that will easily drive the narrative and I don't think debunking it would change anything. Maybe I failed to bring that across.

 

[harrytwatter]

"Stocks rallied Friday, after new data revealed the coronovirus pandemic sparked a historic labor market collapse in the world's largest economy last month, but at a pace below expectations"

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coro...-debate-us-ny-case-split-grows-191100242.html

Phew! Thank god we'll all be alright!

 

[Philip J. Fry]

Thank God there's republicans standing up to Trump!

There are many interesting points of view. I.e. https://hbr.org/2019/10/gdp-is-not-a-measure-of-human-well-being

I'm not taking political sides, I guess I belong to neither side of the political spectrum in the US. I'm pro personal freedom, pro-education, pro-health-care, pro-guns, pro-business, pro-legalization, pro lean government, pro gay marriage ...

I'm just pointing out that you can make numbers say whatever you want if you just pick the right ones, and it's being abused in all forms of political debate, from "the gender gap" in wages, to racist lawmaking, and in subjects like this. You can probably make the stats say that people driving a certain brand of car have a 0.001% of being infected - but it doesn't make it true.

I agree that GDP is no longer a measure of well-being. It was 50, 100, or 200 years ago but, in today's day and age, it is not. With the Industrial Revolution, we have more products than we need. With automation and new technology, we're beginning to have more workers than we need, or that's what it appears like with automated warehouses, self-driving cars, and so forth.

As for what you say about your beliefs and political parties, you'd be happy to know that a person's political world view (their political philosophy) has nothing to do with political parties! Politics and a political party are two different things and most people don't know that, unless they have a grad school education in politics.

You actually need an education in politics and philosophy to discover your political world view, as it takes many hours of reading, writing, debating, listening and refinement. Most people are only exposed to politics from TV, unfortunately. They lack the cultivation that's needed to teach them what politics is.

As for statistics, yes, that's a flaw of statistics. Statistics can only describe but it can't explain why. You need reasoning to explain why, which is why words trump numbers in the end of the day. Numbers can not tell you how to live your life, what is good or bad, what is beauty (yes, there's the golden ratio but it argues for symmetry; I'm talking about the philosophy of aesthetics), or, in the case of this thread, what society should be move towards or away from. That's political philosophy and that's why, even with people looking at a single statistic, there can be many interpretations, since everyone has their own world view.

100% agree.
Could also be true, but irrelevant.

I know that me picture didn't prove anything. I meant to point out that pictures like that will easily drive the narrative and I don't think debunking it would change anything. Maybe I failed to bring that across.

I'm actually taking a 500 level Philosophy of Science class in the Fall. We're going to discuss the methodology of Science, how sound it is, uses for it, the flaws of it, and other things. Before the Enlightenment, the Scientific Method wasn't a thing and, in today's day, we use it a lot; but, it doesn't mean that there's flaws or limitations to Science.

I'm really excited for this class! To me, a few years ago, you could say "science proved this," and I would believe you! But now, to know that science itself could be doubted is really fascinating! I'm not anti-science or pro-conspiracy theories; but, I think it'll be helpful to know the limits of science, as it is so present in our everyday lives.

 

[CCarter]

USA is at 36.5 million people unemployed as of May 9th:

Time to turn the ship around folks, time to stop goofing off and get back to work.

 

[CCarter]

The USA government admits UFO exist and confirms 3 videos are indeed UFOs... no one cares.

Okay, lets try this, Dog-like robots are now patrolling parks warning bystands to social distance:

This is usually the beginning of the movie where things start taking a nasty turn.

I feel like releasing sinister dog robots into parks to “maintain the peace” doesn’t seem like a good idea.

 

[bernard]

I've been fascinated with that dog robot since I first saw it.

It will allow a whole new level of "good neighborhoods".

Just let the dog roam and catch intruders.

 

[WinMore]

Dystopian future awaits. It was inevitable, just didn't think it would approach this quickly.

 

[Jared]

Let me just say . . .

The media going from obsessing over coronavirus and demanding we not leave our homes lest the apocalypse arrive, to completely ignoring it while promoting enormous public gatherings, is one of the strangest things I've ever seen.

This is all pre-election social engineering, isn't it?

 

[Jared]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1269380648394948613