Jump to content

Do you need to vent about things COVID-19?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

*****ing *****ed up mother *****ers are *****ing the whole *****ing *****ed up ****sucking *****head *****s. And then some.

Cutting in with a rando side comment because I haven’t kept up - I’m tired of all the conspiracy theories behind it, and all the Americans on my feeds (note: I am also an American) pointing fingers at

One thing that really irritates me to no end is noticing some companies taking advantage of this virus..Mine being one of them.. They put everyone on furlough when it all first began and saying i

Posted Images

On 10/5/2020 at 10:05 AM, Pussycat Catnap said:

California has had cyclical droughts since we had to deal with mammoth's pulling up in the parking lot and taking our spot next to the cave...

It's the nature of this land. Away from the direct coast most of it is desert - and that was, until the lat 1800s, wetlands. The entire San Joaquin Valley of Central Cali - basically Sacramento to Bakersfield - was one massive huge swamp that the white folks drained in the name of Capitalism. That's only made the desert dry aspects worse.

We're called the Golden State for a reason - and not the mineral, but because every year all of the native ground cover changes to a golden color to survive the climate here.

That said... water wise... we actually export water. Both internally and externally. Anyone is Southern Cali is a water thief taking the water from MY delta... 😛

- We also send a back and forth to the nearby states. We are a desert, but we also have those mountains, and they produce a LOT of water.

The problems faced by people living here are more about water politics than actual supply. Too much is sent to the wrong places during the dry cycles, and often not enough to the same places during the wet cycles...

If you want to see a complex area of law and politics unique to California, study water law...

Also... those wetlands do now make up our agricultural 'bread basket'... Like the Hetch hetchy reservoir - reverting it back to it's native stance might actually cause more harm than it repairs... thus why environmentalists end up fighting each other in these debates. Do note though that restoring wetlands has been a BIG thing in California since the 1990s - everywhere it can be done. Mostly the coastal wetlands that were also drained because 19th and 20th century folk saw them as 'blight' or 'wasted land' and didn't know how vital they were to the local ecosystems.

 

 

Very interesting.

Oh, I remember another drought about 25 years ago or so, they had The Water Police.  lol  I'm serious - it's true.  Cars going around with Water Police written on them checking to see if we were watering our lawns or plants.  If we did, we were fined.  All lawns and many plants died in that drought.  And, it's happening again here where I live.  Not the Water Police this time, we've just been told to cut back on water.  Our garden where I live looks terrible and it's been chopped back in half and not watered much these past months.  Not much I could do when the Water Police were driving around and not much I can do now about our garden as I just rent here.  

Aaaaaaaaaaah.  I hate to see our garden dying like this.  

But, yes, I know California is desert...we are where the desert meets the sea.  I love the desert South West though...I'm like Jim Morrison in that way, but Winter is my favorite time in the desert South West.  Nothing like it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Not here. Ontario's test positivity rate is about 1.8%, yet our Rₜ is about 1.05 -- meaning the spread of infection is still increasing. Looking at the slope of the case count, it's spreading pretty fast. (That Rₜ must determine the exponent on the growth curve, but I'm neither mathematician nor epidemiologist enough to know quite how.)

Presumably, the more testing one does, the lower the positivity rate should be to represent the same rate of spread. I guess there's much more testing here than in most of the US, but there's still nowhere near enough to satisfy public health objectives. In fact, the rising wave of cases now forced them to reserve testing capacity for only symptomatic and certain contact-traced cases, except for a weird parallel path of asymptomatic-only testing at select pharmacies. All testing is now by appointment only.

The problem is that by late summer we had the count down far enough to plausibly start re-opening things, but nobody in politics had the guts to clamp back down when the case counts started rising, just before school opened. Now it's a mess, by no means totally attributable to schools, but the virus has now left contact tracing far behind, so nobody knows anymore where all these cases are coming from -- including many in schools -- so I really don't put a lot of stock in the claim that kids don't spread the virus. 

Just in passing: Quebec's statistics are much, much worse than elsewhere in Canada, including Ontario. Only the Atlantic provinces really have it under control -- and they're wisely maintaining a "bubble" not letting anybody else in without strict and extended quarantine.

Possibly California still grows some avocados, but up here all I ever see are from Mexico, and that's not a happy story. In our house, we feel much less guilty about eating some meat than about an occasional avocado indulgence.

I just checked and Canada is at a 3.8% positivity rate right now..  It looks like it's been going up since the end of August..

Being below 5% just means that an epidemic is under control in a country..

We're hitting a spike as well in the U.S, from the looks of it and at 5.2%.. since the beginning of August we have been heading downward from our last spike, which more than likely was when we started to do more testing..

Positivity rate right now is the best way they can see in a region how the spread is doing..

Where I am at, if I take my temperature at home and have a fever, my work will tell me to go get tested..

I just run down the street and  get tested..I'm back before breakfast gets cold..But since it takes days to get the test results, I'm off work until my results get back, but at least it's with pay..

I was dead to rights sure that some people at work were going to take advantage of hearing that.. but nobody has really done it yet.. we had one guy that had a fever and they made him get tested..that was like two months ago.. hehehehe

 

If I'm sounding like I'm all over the board..it's just because I just got off work and am totally wired..hehehe

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2020 at 4:23 PM, Paul Hexem said:
On 10/5/2020 at 12:29 PM, Seicher Rae said:

You called "me" out by inferring that anyone on SSDI is a blight on society.

That's not what I wrote.

I wrote "I know people". Specific people. Specific people aren't "anyone on SSDI". Those are two completely different statements.

I'm glad you've changed your thinking and don't believe anymore that most people who receive disability are liars and cheats. Years ago when this came up in a debate you brought up this same cheating person you know, using him as proof that those needing assistance are liars. It was within the discussion of how you believed the government wants to control us and take away our liberty by not allowing businesses to cite religious freedom rights as an excuse to discriminate.

In this Covid crisis the lower classes need to stick together and not allow ourselves to be divided and conquered by those who want to squeeze us more and more to continue enjoying their massive profits. If you read History you may be aware of one of the most notorious examples of this tactic -- the "welfare queen" used by Reagan to get the working class riled up about those they imagine are taking away their money via excessive taxation to assist them, thereby ignoring the real reason their wages were continuing to slide down. The tactic continues to this day -- attempting to make those who are seeing their wages drop blame those in society less fortunate or relegated to the bottom class -- POC and the disabled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Paul Hexem said:
On 10/6/2020 at 1:06 AM, Pomeline Pancake said:

It's a shame that some people you know are abusing the system. Unfortunately there's no other way for others to make it in this world if they're severely impacted by a disability.

I think it's more likely that there are, but the people in power just aren't creative or motivated enough to put them into working order.

The issue isn't whether people are creative or motivated enough to retrofit work environments so those who are disabled can then work -- the issue is cost. It would take massive amounts of funds to create environments so those who are physically or mentally disabled could work within them, tailoring conditions to the needs of each individual under the supervision of psychologists and physicians. It's cheaper just to pay the SSI recipient 800 usd per month and forget about them.

There actually are a few programs that assist disabled people so they can work, but they are more motivated by charity so as to give those who have trouble working in society a sense of independence and purpose, as they seldom  (if ever) turn a profit for the business owner unless subsidized by the government.

I can tell you which party does funnel more money into these types of programs to help the "weak" and the "losers" though, and it isn't the Trumpie party you voted for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I just checked and Canada is at a 3.8% positivity rate right now..  It looks like it's been going up since the end of August..

Being below 5% just means that an epidemic is under control in a country..

Hmm. I'm seeing 2.1% Canada-wide, according to Health Canada, so I wonder if we're looking at different numbers. Ontario is a little lower than the national average now (I'm seeing 1.9% now, up 0.1% from the day before) but there are parts of Toronto where it supposedly exceeds 10%.

But it's all so very dependent on who gets tested. Back when only symptomatic people and close contacts of confirmed cases were getting tests, the positivity rates were huge. Then less but still pretty high when asymptomatic folks could get testing on their own initiative. Later, when having a negative test became necessary for work or school, there were way more tests and way lower positivity. If we were to perform truly random sampling of the overall population, of course, the positivity rate would be very small (at least of these tests for active virus, rather than merely detecting presence of antibodies from a past infection), even if the virus was spreading like wildfire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'm glad you've changed your thinking and don't believe anymore that most people who receive disability are liars and cheats. Years ago when this came up in a debate you brought up this same cheating person you know, using him as proof that those needing assistance are liars. It was within the discussion of how you believed the government wants to control us and take away our liberty by not allowing businesses to cite religious freedom rights as an excuse to discriminate.

In this Covid crisis the lower classes need to stick together and not allow ourselves to be divided and conquered by those who want to squeeze us more and more to continue enjoying their massive profits. If you read History you may be aware of one of the most notorious examples of this tactic -- the "welfare queen" used by Reagan to get the working class riled up about those they imagine are taking away their money via excessive taxation to assist them, thereby ignoring the real reason their wages were continuing to slide down. The tactic continues to this day -- attempting to make those who are seeing their wages drop blame those in society less fortunate or relegated to the bottom class -- POC and the disabled.

 

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

The issue isn't whether people are creative or motivated enough to retrofit work environments so those who are disabled can then work -- the issue is cost. It would take massive amounts of funds to create environments so those who are physically or mentally disabled could work within them, tailoring conditions to the needs of each individual under the supervision of psychologists and physicians. It's cheaper just to pay the SSI recipient 800 usd per month and forget about them.

There actually are a few programs that assist disabled people so they can work, but they are more motivated by charity so as to give those who have trouble working in society a sense of independence and purpose, as they seldom  (if ever) turn a profit for the business owner unless subsidized by the government.

I can tell you which party does funnel more money into these types of programs to help the "weak" and the "losers" though, and it isn't the Trumpie party you voted for.

I liked that part where you revived a finished conversation with two separate posts and then doubled down on being wrong, while injecting politics into it.

It's like a schoolgirl with a crush, insisting she hates someone, but making him part of every unrelated conversation. I didn't vote for him, but I think this year I will- just for you.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

 

I liked that part where you revived a finished conversation with two separate posts and then doubled down on being wrong, while injecting politics into it.

It's like a schoolgirl with a crush, insisting she hates someone, but making him part of every unrelated conversation. I didn't vote for him, but I think this year I will- just for you.

Think that is how he got in the last time. The lefties couldn't stop talking about him and so a bunch got confused and voted for him. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Hexem said:

It's like a schoolgirl with a crush, insisting she hates someone, but making him part of every unrelated conversation. I didn't vote for him, but I think this year I will- just for you.

This isn't about me and which candidate I dislike. It's about the millions who will lose health insurance or not have pre-existing condition protections in the midst of a coronavirus crisis when even more are going to need health care. Many will die because of it.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments Nov. 10 in a case seeking to overturn the law that brought insurance coverage to millions of Americans.
Look it up. 

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/05/919704165/the-election-and-a-fresh-obamacare-challenge-loom-over-new-supreme-court-term

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Think that is how he got in the last time. The lefties couldn't stop talking about him and so a bunch got confused and voted for him.

Arielle, you are a Canadian and don't have to worry about getting needed health care in the midst of this pandemic -- if you're going to participate in this discussion you need to display some empathy.

For Americans, as of one year ago there were over 30 million Americans without health insurance and the means to treat a coronavirus infection should they become ill.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/200955/americans-without-health-insurance/#:~:text=In the first half of 2019%2C approximately 30.9,in the United States had no health insurance.

No doubt, many more are now without care in 2020 as many lost their jobs of late and the health insurance which accompanied it.  And on top of this we are set for 20 million more with health insurance under the ACA to lose their insurance as well. Plus millions could lose health insurance due to having a pre-existing condition, protected now under Obamacare (ACA).

We need the protection of a public option for health insurance, and fortunately we have a party willing to achieve this goal.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

This isn't about me and which candidate I dislike.

Sure it is. 

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

We need the protection of a public option for health insurance, and fortunately we have a party willing to achieve this goal.

Yeah! Trump 2020. He'll tackle this COVID thing. He obviously knows what he's talking about. We have nothing to worry about!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

We need the protection of a public option for health insurance, and fortunately we have a party willing to achieve this goal.

Yeah! Trump 2020. He'll tackle this COVID thing. He obviously knows what he's talking about. We have nothing to worry about!

It's Biden who has the public option within his health plan -- this would cover all people sick from Covid and not leave some without care as Trump's "plan" does:

https://joebiden.com/healthcare/#

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pussycat Catnap said:

 

Chilling.

I thank the Universe every day that my daughter (a teacher) lives in a more liberal area (SF) where they don't force teachers and students back to work when it's unsafe, as they are in some Republican-led states in the South.

I can't even imagine her dying alone without me being able to be there with her. If I think about it longer I'll sink into a horrid depression..

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's Biden who has the public option within his health plan -- this would cover all people sick from Covid and not leave some without care as Trump's "plan" does:

https://joebiden.com/healthcare/#

Don't even need to read it to know it's wrong. Trump's got the plan to handle COVID. It's why he allowed COVID to infect him at all, so he could learn about it and outsmart it. Duh.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the CDC, the average height of a US man is 69 inches and a woman 63.6 inches. Allowing the approximation of simple parity between men and women in the COVID death statistics, this means that with the estimated two-hundred and eleven thousand COVID fatalities, you could line the bodies up head to toe from New York City to Boston, and then to Framingham, MA, and still have enough bodies for another ten miles of murder.

Edited by Chroma Starlight
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Chroma Starlight said:

... another ten miles of murder.

Miles of death, certainly. And notwithstanding the task force chair's protestations at the debate last night, it's pretty impossible to deny they're victims of negligent homicide, given how woefully worse the US's death toll is compared to practically every other advanced nation. That is to say, at best they just didn't care enough to do better.

But "murder"? Was it intentional? Rather than dismissing that out-of-hand as hyperbole, it may be time to seriously consider the possibility. Imagine what you'd do in response to a pandemic if your objective were to maximize its long term benefit to the 0.1% wealthiest Americans. Besides funnelling trillions of "stimulus" borrowing into the accounts of the very wealthiest (having already made them effectively immune to taxation), could you use the suffering of millions to force those without wealth into extreme poverty and homelessness, effectively becoming economic slaves for even the least scrap of sustenance? An impoverished workforce is an inexpensive workforce. Given enough wealth at the very top, there's still demand enough to grow a luxury-only economy rather than wasting precious resources on the needs of the poor and middle class.

So if that were your mission, how would you go about doing that? Would you do anything different from what's happening in America right now?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Miles of death, certainly. And notwithstanding the task force chair's protestations at the debate last night, it's pretty impossible to deny they're victims of negligent homicide, given how woefully worse the US's death toll is compared to practically every other advanced nation. That is to say, at best they just didn't care enough to do better.

But "murder"? Was it intentional? Rather than dismissing that out-of-hand as hyperbole, it may be time to seriously consider the possibility. Imagine what you'd do in response to a pandemic if your objective were to maximize its long term benefit to the 0.1% wealthiest Americans. Besides funnelling trillions of "stimulus" borrowing into the accounts of the very wealthiest (having already made them effectively immune to taxation), could you use the suffering of millions to force those without wealth into extreme poverty and homelessness, effectively becoming economic slaves for even the least scrap of sustenance? An impoverished workforce is an inexpensive workforce. Given enough wealth at the very top, there's still demand enough to grow a luxury-only economy rather than wasting precious resources on the needs of the poor and middle class.

So if that were your mission, how would you go about doing that? Would you do anything different from what's happening in America right now?

We may have a worse death toll but not a worse case fatality rate per 100,000 population than many advanced countries..We're at like 2.8%.. We're lower than the European union which is at 4.7%..

We're lower than Germany which is at 3.1%..

Switzerland 3.2%

Spain 3.9%

Ireland 4.6%

France 5.0%

Canada 5.5%

Sweden 6.1%

Uk 7.8%

Italy, 10.8%

That is as of today with the most current numbers.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

We may have a worse death toll but not a worse case fatality rate per 100,000 population than many advanced countries..We're at like 2.8%.. We're lower than the European union which is at 4.7%..

With straight up deaths per 100,000 population, the only EU countries worse than the United States are Spain and Belgium.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lyssa Greymoon said:

With straight up deaths per 100,000 population, the only EU countries worse than the United States are Spain and Belgium.

If you mean we have more in our population to give us more 100,000's than the others I mentioned..then yea..

But fatality per 100,000. No.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mango Mussolini is getting crazier by the day in his tweets. I've stopped worrying about whether he'll get elected and ruin the health care of millions in this Covid crisis, and started worrying about his proximity to the suitcase with nuclear missile launch capability.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

I mean deaths per 100,000 population. 

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

If you go below the chart and look at the stats where they show all the countries, you'll see where the numbers I put up are true..

The chart in your link is showing the top 20 currently most affected countries..it's not showing the ones with the higher fatality rate per 100,000..

This is updated daily..If you scroll down to the case fatality rate map you can put whatever countries you want on the list..

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#the-case-fatality-rate

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

The chart in your link is showing the top 20 currently most affected countries..it's not showing the ones with the higher fatality rate per 100,000..

Scroll down to case and mortality by country. There's a full list of countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...