To Open or Not to Open

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
There can be life without an economy.

There can be no economy without life.

Simple, but effective.

A struggling or declining economy can have an equal if not more than wuflu mortality rate.

That is not correct. Many countries (eg Greece) in very recent history, have already gone through economic collapse and months of austerity. Millions didn't die.

Are you saying millions died in Greece?

I'm saying that millions survived the Greek economic turmoil of 2015.

With a quick search the deathrate in italy from 2014 to 2015 rose .9 percent. Its projected that the rate will remain less than a half percent from 2019 to 2020. Even with covid.

... and there are and estimated 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (I think that's 81 zero's) atoms in the universe. But that would be entirely beside the point.

I'm fairly sure that analysis of the mortality rates 3 to 4 years ago in Italy won't really be a good basis to decide if the US should stop it's lockdown/s.

You could have just said that the discussion is over your head.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: American-philosopher

You don't stop taking the medicine until after it has worked.

Do you take the medication until it kills you or ceases to allow you to function?

Even in the case of cancer, when chemo drugs are toxic, the increased chance of survival is what guides medicine.

I don't define human value by how much stuff they have.

Lots of people in this world live, despite poverty.

And this economic situation is also temporary. Death isn't.

I think you may be missing the part where the economy is directly tied to health and well being. Specifically holding a job and building wealth over time.

Dying of a disease is also a highly significant factor in someone's health and well being.

That's legitimate but tell me this. Which is higher, the number of infected or the number of currently unemployed?

Food for thought, what do you think the ratio would be for unemployed to covid deaths?

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

Just imagine how many dead there will be from a civil uprising that occurs after the economy tanks

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

It means extended austerity and social distancing, which we will survive, rather than the exponentially increasing and fairly definite death rate of letting the virus run rampant.

What's this "we" crap, you got a frog in your pocket?

I see a bunch of stats about America, but what state are you in again?

a reply to: chr0naut

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

i'm 100% sure that that not all of the dead had an earning capacity and a level of productivity that was a viable part of the economy.

two come to mind straight off, the unemployed homeless , and retired living in old folks homes whose incomes maybe growing stagnant as cost increases.

double post

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: Sookiechacha

I was under the impression he could do some executive orders. and we are still under National emergency, so doesnt that broaden the presidents powers?

He could. He could declare Martial Law, and make things tighter. But, as it stands now, all shutdown are either local or state orders.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

This would mean the deaths of 1,029,600 people. The earning capability of those people represent a fairly large economic loss for the country of nearly 65 trillion dollars per annum (based upon average income figures).

Did you seriously just say that 1 million people contribute 65 trillion dollars a year to the economy?

wow, just wow.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: American-philosopher

You don't stop taking the medicine until after it has worked.

Do you take the medication until it kills you or ceases to allow you to function?

Even in the case of cancer, when chemo drugs are toxic, the increased chance of survival is what guides medicine.

I don't define human value by how much stuff they have.

Lots of people in this world live, despite poverty.

And this economic situation is also temporary. Death isn't.

That's a pretty bad example, since 10 year studies have shown that the overall rate of cancer patients that have done chemo vs those that have not show that besides 4 cancer types, chemo actually shortens lives.

That's why places like America only do 5 year statistics.

They play with the numbers.

My wife had a friend with breast cancer that went through three different chemo treatments, lived in agony her last 2 years and died a horrible death.

Since she lived 5 years and 4 months past her original diagnosis she was considered cured by chemo.

Winner, right?

Much like our economy is going.

My 23 year old son died of Ewings Sarcoma in 2018.

The cancer was diagnosed and he had chemo in 2015. It put the cancer into a brief remission. The cancer was inoperable because it was on the spine but chemo definitely shrunk the tumor and we thought it was beaten.

The cancer returned in 2018, despite aggressive chemo, the cancer was not reducing and so my son chose to stop the chemo (it was just reducing the quality of life of the little time he had left), and to try just radiation treatment, and to manage the progression through palliative care.

The cancer went metastatic in weeks and peppered his body with hundreds of tumors, making radiation treatment out of the question, too.

The chemo gave him a year and a bit with his son and new wife. We were aware that it was toxic, to the point where he couldn't kiss his wife or child for fear of poisoning them. It doesn't always work but sometimes it does and we held on to that slim hope. It is very hard to let someone you love, who is definitely terminal, simply slide away.

There are also many people who go through chemo and don't die of either chemo or cancer.

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

This would mean the deaths of 1,029,600 people. The earning capability of those people represent a fairly large economic loss for the country of nearly 65 trillion dollars per annum (based upon average income figures).

Did you seriously just say that 1 million people contribute 65 trillion dollars a year to the economy?

wow, just wow.

1,000,000 x $65,000 = $65,000,000,000

Try it on a calculator if you need to.

But that is how much they earn. I would assume that their overall productivity has a greater economic value. If they were paid more than they were worth, no one would make any profit from their productivity.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

It means extended austerity and social distancing, which we will survive, rather than the exponentially increasing and fairly definite death rate of letting the virus run rampant.

What's this "we" crap, you got a frog in your pocket?

I see a bunch of stats about America, but what state are you in again?

Wouldn't that be "oui"?



I'm not an American, but the virus is a world wide problem, even to countries that appear to nearly have it beaten at the moment.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: chr0naut

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

i'm 100% sure that that not all of the dead had an earning capacity and a level of productivity that was a viable part of the economy.

two come to mind straight off, the unemployed homeless , and retired living in old folks homes whose incomes maybe growing stagnant as cost increases.

True.

But they can potentially be large infection sources in the population that are hard to counter, despite their minor individual economic footprints.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
There can be life without an economy.

There can be no economy without life.

Simple, but effective.

A struggling or declining economy can have an equal if not more than wuflu mortality rate.

That is not correct. Many countries (eg Greece) in very recent history, have already gone through economic collapse and months of austerity. Millions didn't die.

Are you saying millions died in Greece?

I'm saying that millions survived the Greek economic turmoil of 2015.

With a quick search the deathrate in italy from 2014 to 2015 rose .9 percent. Its projected that the rate will remain less than a half percent from 2019 to 2020. Even with covid.

... and there are and estimated 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (I think that's 81 zero's) atoms in the universe. But that would be entirely beside the point.

I'm fairly sure that analysis of the mortality rates 3 to 4 years ago in Italy won't really be a good basis to decide if the US should stop it's lockdown/s.

You could have just said that the discussion is over your head.

But it isn't.

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: American-philosopher

You don't stop taking the medicine until after it has worked.

Do you take the medication until it kills you or ceases to allow you to function?

Even in the case of cancer, when chemo drugs are toxic, the increased chance of survival is what guides medicine.

I don't define human value by how much stuff they have.

Lots of people in this world live, despite poverty.

And this economic situation is also temporary. Death isn't.

I think you may be missing the part where the economy is directly tied to health and well being. Specifically holding a job and building wealth over time.

Dying of a disease is also a highly significant factor in someone's health and well being.

That's legitimate but tell me this. Which is higher, the number of infected or the number of currently unemployed?

Food for thought, what do you think the ratio would be for unemployed to covid deaths?

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

Just imagine how many dead there will be from a civil uprising that occurs after the economy tanks

Just look at who their target would be!

And, oh, they are armed!

Isn't that what the US Constitution is all about?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: American-philosopher

You don't stop taking the medicine until after it has worked.

Do you take the medication until it kills you or ceases to allow you to function?

Even in the case of cancer, when chemo drugs are toxic, the increased chance of survival is what guides medicine.

I don't define human value by how much stuff they have.

Lots of people in this world live, despite poverty.

And this economic situation is also temporary. Death isn't.

I think you may be missing the part where the economy is directly tied to health and well being. Specifically holding a job and building wealth over time.

Dying of a disease is also a highly significant factor in someone's health and well being.

That's legitimate but tell me this. Which is higher, the number of infected or the number of currently unemployed?

Food for thought, what do you think the ratio would be for unemployed to covid deaths?

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

Just imagine how many dead there will be from a civil uprising that occurs after the economy tanks

Just look at who their target would be!

And, oh, they are armed!

Isn't that what the US Constitution is all about?

Armed?

And so are we.

Don't you wish you had a Constitution?

a reply to: Raggedyman

"t’s simple, if you are in the “high risk category” then stay isolated, if not, go about your lives
We are adults, we can make our own decisions, don’t need a government to tell us what to do"

THANK YOU!

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: American-philosopher

You don't stop taking the medicine until after it has worked.

Do you take the medication until it kills you or ceases to allow you to function?

Even in the case of cancer, when chemo drugs are toxic, the increased chance of survival is what guides medicine.

I don't define human value by how much stuff they have.

Lots of people in this world live, despite poverty.

And this economic situation is also temporary. Death isn't.

I think you may be missing the part where the economy is directly tied to health and well being. Specifically holding a job and building wealth over time.

Dying of a disease is also a highly significant factor in someone's health and well being.

That's legitimate but tell me this. Which is higher, the number of infected or the number of currently unemployed?

Food for thought, what do you think the ratio would be for unemployed to covid deaths?

I'm fairly sure that 100% of the dead from COVID-19, aren't going to be workers. Each of them has an earning capacity and a level of productivity that can no longer be a viable part of the economy if they are dead.

Just imagine how many dead there will be from a civil uprising that occurs after the economy tanks

Just look at who their target would be!

And, oh, they are armed!

Isn't that what the US Constitution is all about?

Armed?

And so are we.

Don't you wish you had a Constitution?

New Zealand (where I am a permanent resident) has a treaty that covers the application of British Common Law to all citizens:

Treaty of Waitangi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Australia (where I am a citizen) does have a Constitution that also incorporates British Common Law. Neither Australia nor New Zealand rebelled against Britain and their independence was granted mutually and peacefully:

Constitution of Australia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The US Constitution does not directly acknowledge or ratify British Common Law but many commentators assume that, from Article II of the Constitution, US Law has a basis in British Common Law and applies where US law is lacking (like in the case of presumption of innocence in a court of law). The US rebelled.

There has been adequate time to codify specific American law similar to, but different than, the British Common Law.

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

This would mean the deaths of 1,029,600 people. The earning capability of those people represent a fairly large economic loss for the country of nearly 65 trillion dollars per annum (based upon average income figures).

Did you seriously just say that 1 million people contribute 65 trillion dollars a year to the economy?

wow, just wow.

1,000,000 x $65,000 = $65,000,000,000

Try it on a calculator if you need to.

But that is how much they earn. I would assume that their overall productivity has a greater economic value. If they were paid more than they were worth, no one would make any profit from their productivity.

That's um... 65 BILLION. I won't go into everything else you got wrong, that would probably go over your head too.

Sigh...

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

This would mean the deaths of 1,029,600 people. The earning capability of those people represent a fairly large economic loss for the country of nearly 65 trillion dollars per annum (based upon average income figures).

Did you seriously just say that 1 million people contribute 65 trillion dollars a year to the economy?

wow, just wow.

1,000,000 x $65,000 = $65,000,000,000

Try it on a calculator if you need to.

But that is how much they earn. I would assume that their overall productivity has a greater economic value. If they were paid more than they were worth, no one would make any profit from their productivity.

That's um... 65 BILLION. I won't go into everything else you got wrong, that would probably go over your head too.

Sigh...

Sorry, yes, you are right. I was wrong. $65 Billion.

Tough times ahead. I know it's not easy for some of you financially. You can always rebuild but I think the country needs to stay locked down until we find a treatment.

My mom was a registered nurse making $35 an hour. Last year she got lung cancer. The caught it early before it spread. She had to quit her job to get treatment. I drove her to chemo and radiation 50 miles round trip every day for months. They had the freeway shut down to rebuild it. I had to take the main roads. 200,000 cars a day traveled that freeway. They were all on the main roads. It was bumper to bumper and a complete nightmare. What would have normally been 20 minutes each way was 2 hours.

I get a call from my mom one morning. The bank was seizing the house. They had goons in her house tossing stuff on the curb in the rain. Furniture that was passed down in my family for generations was destroyed. All I remember is my bald mom standing in the rain crying her eyes out.

Some of you are gonna have to rebuild. Nobody asked for this to happen. Just be thankful for what you do have whether it be your health or even a chance to rebuild.

I've been taking schizophrenia medications for 20 years. They caused me to get diabetes. I'm having heart and liver complications and I'm only 43 years old.

The treatments my mom underwent damaged her lungs but she's cancer free.

I take care of my grandmother also and she's 78.

I'll be happy if we make it out of this alive. I'm in Detroit and cases skyrocketed. In 40 days we went from zero cases to 25,000. The hospitals are running out of body bags. We don't have enough tests. For every one case they know about there could be 10 or 20 more they don't.

Frankly I'm pretty pissed at the Chinese. I think opening the country is just going to prolong this situation and set us back further in the long run.

I haven't been to the grocery store in 3 weeks. I kid you not I'm living off fried spam and rice.

I am going grocery shopping this week because cases have dropping since we've been told to stay indoors.

originally posted by: IAMALLYETALLIAM

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: chr0naut

What does that mean??

If you can't grasp that statement you may need t o remove the 'philosopher' from your username.

I have a dreaded feeling that no matter what we do from here there has been irreparable damage done to our economies and way of life that things will never be the same again. Socially, economically, politically.

Even if every country started going back to work tomorrow.

What I was asing for was to expand and give more details, to a one off instant statement. that was one sentence. Is it okay to ask for more details??