RE: X5 Unrelated, but Good Information in Times of Need - Page 25

crystalworks · #1 04-24-2020, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

It's not about people die everyday so what's the big deal. It's that our carelessness can be directly responsible for a death(s) much the same if one intentionally ran their car through a crowd.

Literally my point exactly. And we don't outlaw cars because some people drive them through crowds.

I don't know which studies you believe the results of. From past "discussions," with myself and others none that might not support your beliefs. Disregarding a 50 year old study simply because it was old is about as short sighted a thing as I've heard lately. Imagine disregarding all the studies on green house gases or ocean temps from Al Gore's time. Or oceanic work of Jacque Cousteau. Ridiculous.

bcredliner · #2 04-24-2020, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalworks

Literally my point exactly. And we don't outlaw cars because some people drive them through crowds.

I don't know which studies you believe the results of. From past "discussions," with myself and others none that might not support your beliefs. Disregarding a 50 year old study simply because it was old is about as short sighted a thing as I've heard lately. Imagine disregarding all the studies on green house gases or ocean temps from Al Gore's time. Or oceanic work of Jacque Cousteau. Ridiculous.

My opinion concerning the deaths due to unemployment has nothing to do with any other study. "Discussions" on any other study would need to be evaluated individually. No, I can't imagine ignoring studies on greenhouses gases though I would start reading the most recent study.

I would love to hear why communication, medication and financial opportunities of that time don't matter. This started when the study was used to contend 1% increase in unemployment resulted in 40,000 deaths. That's what I challenged. Since then I have been proven wrong that it was from a movie script and the death rate range was acknowledged in that study that it could be a low as 1,500. The process of that unemployment study might provide some basis for updating but it should not be accepted without questioning viability when it is 50 years old.

bcredliner · #3 04-23-2020, 03:51 PM

No, I am not looking at it from the perspective of the unemployed or the economy. I am looking at it from the standpoint of facilitating more deaths verses saving lives.

First, note that the number of new cases in Texas is still increasing. Texas has yet to define any plan for reopening other than open as much as possible as soon as possible, per the Governor, beginning May 1 or sooner. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick says "there are worse things than dying". The governor says he will do it safely but has not stated any conditions for reopening just that it is time.

How and when states or cities reopen is not about any one person. It is about all of us as one. The humane and responsible course of action is a reopening with an in depth plan of sufficient testing each and every day. It is a plan to measure, by adequate testing, the number of new cases and a sufficient number of personnel to trace back the persons the new case has exposed. Texas does not have the testing capability as yet nor the personnel to do the tracing. There may be job opening for that though I don't expect Texas will give either necessity consideration.

There is no verification for any percent of increase of deaths based on one percent increase of unemployment. The 40,000 deaths per increase of one per of unemployment originated from the movie 'The Big Short'.

bcredliner · #4 04-23-2020, 08:16 PM

While it makes sense that the more unemployed for some period of time will result in more potential deaths. There is no study that can be used universally. That is due to the huge number of variables between instances. Wasn't kidding, the 40,000 number originated in the movie 'The Big Short'. There was no study behind it. It was just part of the script.

A mayor does not have the authority to defy a state law. They can't open or close, or alter restrictions put in place by the state nor is the US is going to collapse.

The world will return to a new normal at some point. The way to get there sooner is to follow the guidelines to protect from spreading the virus. There is no other or less expensive solution for any of us.

If unemployment and the stimulus payments are not enough to get by then one should look for work in an essential category. There are jobs available at many places such as Amazon that are swamped with orders, business that have benefitted from the pandemic. Or smaller businesses that are deemed essential that need staff as some workers have chosen not to take the risk.

There is a major differences in fatalities from military service, suicides, traffic deaths etc. Soldiers choose to serve, one chooses to commit suicide and if an individual is killed by another driver there is punishment. One does not have the right to choose to risk another's life. They just don't.

Certainly lots of folks will choose to violate the restrictions, a small number already are. They are playing the odds that someone else will get the virus, someone else will die and ignoring any death or damage they might cause. No punishment, who will ever know, I'm not responsible for anyone else. I'm going to do whatever I want. IMO no facts are going to change their course of action unless the virus hits close to home.

crystalworks · #5 04-23-2020, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

While it makes sense that the more unemployed for some period of time will result in more potential deaths. There is no study that can be used universally. That is due to the huge number of variables between instances. Wasn't kidding, the 40,000 number originated in the movie 'The Big Short'. There was no study behind it. It was just part of the script.

They did use it in the movie. But Dr. Harvey Brenner was doing work/studies in the 70's on the subject. That's where they got it from. After doing some more research, it seems 1500 deaths per 1% increase of unemployment is more accurate. So, we're projecting up to 25% (ish), so that's ~30,000 deaths.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

If unemployment and the stimulus payments are not enough to get by then one should look for work in an essential category. There are jobs available at many places such as Amazon that are swamped with orders, business that have benefitted from the pandemic. Or smaller businesses that are deemed essential that need staff as some workers have chosen not to take the risk.

^Wow. You live in a bubble.

Edit: Seems there are different figures ranging from 1500 - 37000. The movie rounded up from 37000, for dramatic effect I assume.

Quote:

The actual figure in academic research is a 37,000 increase for each percentage-point rise in the unemployment rate. It comes from a book called “Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation” by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker.

“Corporate Flight” was published in 1982 and mainly had to do with companies moving operations overseas. I couldn’t reach Bluestone, Harrison or Baker, but last week I was able to contact Wade Thomas, who teaches economics and business at SUNY Oneonta and who quoted those figures in his own co-written 2005 book called “Economic Issues Today: Alternative Approaches.”

Here’s the paragraph from Thomas’ book that applies: “According to one study [the one by Bluestone et al.] a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate will be associated with 37,000 deaths [including 20,000 heart attacks], 920 suicides, 650 homicides, 4,000 state mental hospital admissions and 3,300 state prison admissions.”

bcredliner · #6 04-24-2020, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crystalworks

They did use it in the movie. But Dr. Harvey Brenner was doing work/studies in the 70's on the subject. That's where they got it from. After doing some more research, it seems 1500 deaths per 1% increase of unemployment is more accurate. So, we're projecting up to 25% (ish), so that's ~30,000 deaths.

^Wow. You live in a bubble.

Edit: Seems there are different figures ranging from 1500 - 37000. The movie rounded up from 37000, for dramatic effect I assume.

From the bubble-- I would not use a study with a range of 1,500 to 37,000 to draw any conclusion or studies that are 30-50 years old. Technology, communication, medical advances as examples are extremely advanced.

Overboost · #7 04-23-2020, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

If unemployment and the stimulus payments are not enough to get by then one should look for work in an essential category. There are jobs available at many places such as Amazon that are swamped with orders, business that have benefitted from the pandemic. Or smaller businesses that are deemed essential that need staff as some workers have chosen not to take the risk.

Great Cuomo talking points. You must have got that from the victim in chief himself.

I am in desperation for trying to find some kind of temporary work to make ends meet and I checked Amazon and other "essential categories" and they just don't seem to have any positions available for a 62 year old man.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

Certainly lots of folks will choose to violate the restrictions, a small number already are. They are playing the odds that someone else will get the virus, someone else will die and ignoring any death or damage they might cause. No punishment, who will ever know, I'm not responsible for anyone else. I'm going to do whatever I want. IMO no facts are going to change their course of action unless the virus hits close to home.

My father passed less than 2 weeks ago and buried him this past week in a service that only one family member could attend before even getting the coroner's official cause of death. Is that close enough to home for you?

I honestly don't have any words for you other than I know where you can shove your opinions. Just make sure to wash your hands.

bcredliner · #8 04-24-2020, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overboost

Great Cuomo talking points. You must have got that from the victim in chief himself.

I am in desperation for trying to find some kind of temporary work to make ends meet and I checked Amazon and other "essential categories" and they just don't seem to have any positions available for a 62 year old man.

My father passed less than 2 weeks ago and buried him this past week in a service that only one family member could attend before even getting the coroner's official cause of death. Is that close enough to home for you?

I honestly don't have any words for you other than I know where you can shove your opinions. Just make sure to wash your hands.

I assume you are referencing Trump as the victim in chief? If so, not so. I think Cuomo states the facts and is a great source to eliminate BS.

This is a terrible time and this is something we have had no experience dealing with. Our discussion has been about opening or not opening the economy. Thus far the medical experts have said testing and tracing is insufficient everywhere so the success or failure of any plan can not be monitored. My guess is some areas will do fine but others will run the infected numbers back up. Measures available to protect ourselves are not without flaws. I don't want to infect anyone or get infected so I have chosen to follow the guidelines of the medical experts. They may not have it all right but they know more than we do. I don't think we are qualified to doubt their plan or determine one on our own. I don't see where doing anything else has merit.

Sorry for your loss and that you haven't been able to find work.

EODguy · #9 04-24-2020, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcredliner

There is a major differences in fatalities from military service, suicides, traffic deaths etc. Soldiers choose to serve, one chooses to commit suicide and if an individual is killed by another driver there is punishment. One does not have the right to choose to risk another's life. They just don't.

I'm going to cover this little gem right here...

How in anyway does opening businesses put someone more at risk from another person's actions?

The answer is it doesn't!!

Example: If your happy ass has gone outside the house to buy food and other essentials since this started, then your risk will not be increased by going to more places (if YOU keep taking precautions)

As for the differences in deaths only suicides are different as that is a person doing something that WILL guarantee the end of their life.

A soldier a takes a higher RISK not a certain outcome. The real problem is that too many people are falsely equating more places = more risk and not understanding that if..... Precaution #1 works at the grocery store, then Precaution #1 will also work at some other business. No plan mentioned by anyone has said let's open everything and FORCE people to stand close together at a store and prohibit them from wearing PPE. If that was being said I'd fight that too, but what you're asking for is for others to suffer losing houses, jobs, family members to regular medical issues because you believe it somehow will make your mask and gloves better.

This is so easy.

If you're so worried about the virus.... Don't go outside.

Don't talk to anyone face to face.

Wear your PPE.

Don't do any work at an essential job due to increased risk

.

Do not touch cash.

Do not allow products into your safe space unless it's been sanitized.

And the most important thing is....

Enjoy PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and enjoy not putting the boots to another person's livelihood.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

X5only · #10 04-24-2020, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EODguy

I'm going to cover this little gem right here...

<snip>

This is so easy.

If you're so worried about the virus.... Don't go outside.

Don't talk to anyone face to face.

Wear your PPE.

Don't do any work at an essential job due to increased risk

.

Do not touch cash.

Do not allow products into your safe space unless it's been sanitized.

And the most important thing is....

Enjoy PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and enjoy not putting the boots to another person's livelihood.

Sent from my SM-A730F using Tapatalk

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is a smart virus - it's morphing and will still get ya even as you hide in your cave. If you're predisposed already to other flu viruses, especially if you try to avoid it by sanitizing yourself and your environment excessively, you get rid of other viruses in the process and Coronavirus takes full advantage and moves in swiftly like an evil hungry pirate. It's a smart ass looking for weak/frail or weakening immune system.