Topic: Medical experts within the Trump Administration want a slow reoopening (Read 576 times)

Yeah, right, because the Democrats certainly haven't been willing to drive this country to nearly breaking out in a civil war over their fraudulent attempts to get Trump out of office for the past three years right? Democrats certainly don't have a record of driving their districts into poverty in order to create dependence on entitlement programs right? They also don't advocate for open borders which not only exposed this country to disease, but destroyed the economy by devaluing pay rates for labor now do they?

You underestimate the totally suicidal self destructive nature of these people who demand to be in charge at all costs. They don't care if they burn it all down as long as they get to be in charge of the pile of ashes. If you haven't learned that over the past three years, you are willfully blind. The more disasters they create, the more people run into their open arms looking to be saved by the same people who created the disaster to begin with.

^^^ Now is a great time to set up your new business. When the "opening" comes, you'll be ready to dive in and go.

But you can dive in already, because there is approximately 1 reason why the opening is here already. It's the fear of the people. But many people don't fear. And if government steps in to shut you down, take the government man or woman to court personally for damaging your business.

Why will this work? Because in a jury trial, they don't have proof of a Covid pandemic. Check out Dr. Andrew Kaufmann at Bitchute.com. (https://www.bitchute.com/video/820KuUlAosuB/)

I could understand the point regarding Democrats wanting the economy to flounder under Trump, that's true. But I don't think they'd be willing to actively kill the economy to get to that point. No one knew this was going to happen, and no one wants this to happen.

I've said this before on here, but if Trump is able to show that he did an effective job in fighting this -- then voters aren't going to blame him -- if he is unable to do this though, and it looks like another president (IE Biden) could've done a better job, then voters will vote him out and say he is at fault for at least some of the economic damage.

Oh yeah, NY is totally being cautious here. But I understand it, they have about 1/3 of the US hospitalizations and deaths. Not sure on the Georgia stuff though.

Medical experts within the Trump Administration want a slow reopening.

And here's the reason why!


Foreign Arms Sales Quietly Added To List Of "Essential" Work




Foreign Arms Sales Quietly Added To List Of "Essential" Work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swqTY4kZbLo

TBH , I've read endless analysis on this subject for months (as have a large % of the world's population) and it seems to me there will never be a definitive answer on whether the total life damage/years lost will be worse or better under various 'remedies'.

Each country in the world has its own peculiarities , to do with culture, population density, mobility, demographic and vulnerabilty. Add to that political and social agendas, and most statistics cannot be compared. The same may well be true in different states of the USA.

Unfortunate as it seems, any action taken may make little difference to the overall long term outcome.

One would think this, but let's be honest. It's in the interest of Democrats for the economy to crash before the reelection. Bill Maher said it would be worth it to see the economy crash if it meant Trump would lose 2020.


I read through the metrics and I think it's being overly cautious. I'm one to advocate to being on the side of caution but one of the more stricter proposals is a decline in the 3 day average of deaths and fewer than 2 hospitalizations per 100k population. I'm not sure a city like NY can sustain numbers like these after reopening meaning that prolonged lock down looks to be the future. Reopening the economy means there's going to be an increase in cases, increase in hospitalizations, and deaths. But with social distancing in place I don't think it's enough to overwhelm the healthcare system.

This seems to be the case with Georgia - https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report

*Disclaimer about Georgia - There were reports that the state were not properly counting coronavirus cases and under reporting them. Not sure how accurate the numbers are but I don't think a few unreported cases means you need to reject the data entirely.

That information was presented to substantiate the claim that there are plenty of motives to lie, manipulate data, and intentionally crash our economy under the pretext of safety. Again you topic slide and resort to more chump like ad hominem attacks instead of substantiating your claims. Very convenient your conclusions are above reproach and you need not substantiate anything based on some chickenshit excuse that it is meaningless because I won't accept it. My acceptance is totally irrelevant. Your inability to substantiate your claims is however quite relevant.

What does this have to do with macroeconomics?


I can very easily find you proof that your concerns about macroeconomics were within projections by first finding published records from the BEA and US Commerce Department. Showing published information that your concerns are inside of the models they use, and then linking the current economic advisors using those models based on press conference statements and accessible proven records. What I cannot do, is interview a government spokesperson and ask them how many ousted spies there have been so far, or how many they expect are still remaining and what impact they have. If I spend an hour compiling all of the proof in the world and then you respond with, thats what the spies want you to think! I've wasted my time.

What you've substantiated is that there is a negative economic effect because of Covid. Duh... Your sources aren't saying, "The lockdowns are causing this" they've said "the lockdowns and covid are causing this". Cool, 900,000 jobs lost, what about the 10 billion people that have already died and lost their jobs (I'm counting the subterranean people that have been hit even harder)?

https://www.history.com/news/8-mysterious-underground-cities
https://www.popsci.com/humans-survive-underground/

The difference between my ad hominem and your ad hominem, is I substantiated my claims with sources along with it. You substantiate your claims with proclaiming your conclusions are above reproach, and you need not substantiate anything. I didn't ask you to prove anything about spies. I asked you to document that there was analysis done of the macroeconomic impact that these lock downs would have on the population. You are desperately trying to straw man your way out of this corner you have painted yourself into.

Nice ad hominem, we get right to the meat and bones of the problem, and rather than addressing it, you avoid the entire thing. Can you give me just a little hint on how anyone could possibly go about proving that there aren't spies intentionally infiltrating and sabotaging our public policy?  If I do manage to find definitive proof, will you pink promise that you won't just deny it as a hoax from the Russians that are pretending to be Chinese infiltrators to shift the blame onto the Chinese?

First your point was that the government was not competent of complex economic analysis, so I set out to find evidence to the contrary. I asked you to elaborate on where you stopped believing in common sense so I could find specific proof and not waste my time explaining that 2+2 = 4, and then you come back with ghosts and bigfoot. Can you prove that ghosts exist? No, but you can't prove that they don't exist either. That must mean that ghosts exist and you can make the statement that ghosts exist and anyone who says otherwise is wrong and a hater because they can't prove that they don't exist.

I don't think that we should base our public policy on ghosts.

Convenient out for yourself without documenting anything chump. You are everything you accused me of being.

Yeah, none of that is clear at all. So even if I did prove that Trump approved the best possible choice given the information available at the time of his choice, and that he took into consideration the advice of however many aides and economic/medical experts that I could find evidence of. The models that the experts were basing their advice on were comprehensive and inclusive of your concerns. You'd still be able to nullify all of it with actual baseless claims that someone sabotaged it. What was the point of asking for proof?  

Common sense isn't a baseless assumption, the very definition is the base assumption. If something works the way common sense dictates in 99/100 cases, it becomes common sense and you tend to believe so unless something out of the ordinary dictates otherwise, not the other way around. I don't really care that your world view is "non traditional", just don't bother wasting anyone's time asking them to disprove that the ghost of Lincoln is running the shadow government from the basement of the pentagon.

I believe I was very clear. The government is not monolithic, and a few key individuals can and have sold out this country over the years for private gain. "Common sense" and beliefs are another way of saying baseless assumptions they did their jobs and in our interest. Right now our country is filled with saboteurs at every level of government working for various ideological and profit motives. People don't know it yet, but we are already at war with China. We have been for at least a few years, and they have been at war with us for years before that. They have a very robust fifth column within our nation and part of all the chaos that is happening now is a result of that conflict.

Fair enough, to me it is common sense, but I suppose to you the info in your sources might be common sense.

Anyway, tell me where you start to disagree and I'll start from there. Trump has an interest in the economy, the White House has economic advisors, Trump has consulted with his White House economic advisors, Trump has consulted with his medical advisors, They didn't just make up random stuff to tell the president, they both have the capability (human resources, equipment, ability) to make predictions,  Policy was created based on their input.

Let me know when you find some sources of your own supporting the premise that experts broke down the macroeconomic economic impact of these perpetual lock downs. Critiquing my sources is not the same as having your own. You cry and claim I am just making baseless proclamations, but you yourself have substantiated jack shit as you accuse me of the same.

Great! Lets review your sources. It'll take me a while to get through all of these, but I'll get to them all. Please in the future take a few minutes to read your own sources though. On a few of these so far, the studies that are being cited directly state the opposite of your argument.

I had this point to make in quite a few responses to your sources, so I'm going to move it here rather than address the same thing over and over again. People are trying to compare the flu to Covid just because its a familiar virus and familiarity is comforting. There are significant differences though that make the comparison between Covid and the Flu useless. Flu has an effective treatment and vaccine, so those that are in a higher risk category that don't want to risk expose can choose a flu shot. There isn't the same case with Covid. The reproduction number, fatality and hospitalization rates are substantially different, as is the length and intensity of treatment required.  


Regarding the predictions on Georgia's early reopening, while its still too early to tell exactly how that would go, this isn't really a great sign. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/18/only-america-is-sunday-day-after-thursday/

If it tries to paywall you, heres the important part.


Theres a few interesting parts in your article about how South Korea, did well while the hardest hit states are the ones with the strictest policies. Would it not make more sense to put it the other way around where the states hit the hardest have had to put the strictest measures in place? South Korea dealt with MERS a few years ago, so as soon as they said, hey guys its time to do this again, action was swift and efficient. They had much more efficient shorter term lockdowns because they started before the virus had much traction, and the people all followed them strictly. Italy is a great example for a country that was blindsided by Covid. They had police enforcing that people stay inside, but that was after the point that their hospitals were full, and the fatality rates were 2x higher than ours. They had unchecked covid19 at little fault of their own, and then had to battle it down with very strict measures. We've been sort of half assing it from the beginning, but at least we didn't hit the same rate of transmission Italy did. We end up with a sliding scale where strict measures stay in place for a short amount of time, or lax measures stay in place longer. IE China's crazy forced rounding up of infected people dealt with the problem quick but at substantial cost to civil liberties, somewhat strict for a short period of time (Northern Europe) where people were asked to not go to the grocery store more than once per week, road closures, and really stay away from everyone, or the US where it took us a while before the measures in place were more than just a recommendation. Every time people didn't take the recommendations seriously and got infected, we bumped out the closures longer while we tried to get it under control.  



This is an absolutely valid point. People aren't getting routine vaccinations and research is now focused on covid. In addition, domestic violence and child abuse cases are up. Though I don't have the data available to me to make some sort of equivalency between each person that misses a routine vaccine because nonessential doctors visits are canceled, something to consider is that the damage that Covid has caused so far is already factoring in the measures taken. There were predictions made based on the reproduction rate, the specific conditions for how Covid would spread, and fatality rates as well as long term damage. Medical professionals predicted how much damage Covid would do in different circumstances using the same models we predict the global flu counts and end up fractions of a % off when all said and done.


This is 100% not sarcastic. Why are people under the impression that the jobs go away and never come back? If you need 20 people to staff a hotel under normal situations, but then they lose their jobs because no one is traveling and the lockdowns are going on, would there not be lodging demand in however many months when things are free to resume as normal? In 1968 the economy took a 20% hit from a bad flu season. Everything I can find shows an economic downturn and then uptick after the vaccine became available 4 months later. While I understand there is the possibility for businesses to go under completely and not be able to return, if there is population and demand for goods/services in a location why would that demand go away when things resume? In my case and in my state anyway, my business expenses have been frozen. They'll have to be repaid, but repayment will begin after the emergency orders are lifted. On the contrary, I'd be in worse shape if the restrictions were lifted now, and had to pay expenses but sales were reduced because people chose to stay home.

The lockdown orders give legal protections to businesses that could otherwise be harassed by creditors or forced into bankruptcy just from people's choice to stay home. They also give legal protections to employees that could be forced into unemployment because their employer didn't value health guidelines if they were guidelines instead of orders.


Again, I agree with the sentiment, but you may want to read the study itself its referencing. Your link directs you to bloomberg, which directs you to wellbeingtrust.org which seems reliable enough, but its not their study. That then directs you to an article published in the JAMA Psychiatry journal which has not been peer reviewed yet. It is well reasoned and thought out, but its not calling itself a study, its a respectable opinion piece. Anyway, even if inclined to treat it as fact, as I will because even if not 100% accurate, it appears to have credible reason behind each of its claims, there are a few parts I imagine we'd both disagree with. It blames the increased sale of firearms during Covid as a major contributor to the increase suicides expected to see over the next 10 years. There is mention of the role isolation and economic stress plays, but its also factoring in the stress and death from the illness itself. I'm not dismissing this point, but heres an important part.



https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2764584


Yup, NYC may lose 900,000 jobs. Compared to how many otherwise?

To be abundantly optimistic, lets use New York state's statistics instead of New York City's. *Will return running the numbers for you*





So heres one I'm fairly well versed with that doesn't require hunting for data. I'm happy to go find official sources to rehash what I'm writing. There is no food shortage and the supply chain isn't broken per say. About half of food supplies are distributed to vendors like grocery stores, and half are distributed to restaurants. The transportation roles still exist, and the food exists, but they don't have contracts with grocery stores to deliver food, despite the food demand shifting from restaurant to grocery stores. Demand for certain foods is a little screwy, like potatoes which are served as french fries at restaurants are not proportionately being eaten by consumers that wouldn't make french fries themselves at home. Its a change, but not inherently long lasting or problematic. 






Overstating of the threat:











Corruption and power driving motives:


























Incompetence of government and experts:










[/quote]

Unemployment benefits come from money withheld from an individual's paycheck. About 6% of your paycheck is taken and withheld by your employer to pay for your unemployment benefits in case you need them. Its not the country or anyone else paying for it besides the individual. Same concept as taking a % of your paycheck and putting it on top of a jar above the fridge, except its forced and possibly invested to earn them money. Same deal as social security if you are of retirement age.

https://eligibility.com/unemployment/where-do-unemployment-benefit-funds-come-from

Then let NY and NJ pay their own unemployment and welfare costs for those remaining unemployed by their metrics that their experts have agreed on in their infinite wisdom.

Those of us in the other parts of the country don't want to support and pay for that.

We don't want to bail out their social democracy experiment in corruption, or their government employees bankrupt pension plan, or any other part of their mess.

That's the hard thing to balance here, you have to strike a balance between public health risk and the reward of eyeopening the economy. Neither side of the aisle is going to want the economy to die, no one wants that to happen, but the parties have a bit of a different take on how they want to go about things and that's okay.

I think that at the end of the day we should follow scientific metrics in how we're going to open the country -- as a country we should follow something like NY in how we're going to open - https://forward.ny.gov/regional-monitoring-dashboard - take a look here and this will show you.

NY (and I think NJ too) is following a metric based system in how they're going to open different parts of the state if they're able to pass different metrics that experts have agreed on.

This is the most logical approach because a public policy maker's job is to reasonably outweigh risks and balance them with the greater good. But considering US politics is an utter shit show, I've seen people try to make the argument that every life counts and that it's not worth reopening the economy because "people may die". We have the data and it's clear that it points to a reopening, but because grandma might die, this apparently means healthy 25 year olds can't work.

No, my second point was actually real, you communist puppet. You are allowed to make outlandish claims without any proof other than that its a possibility, so I'm just mirroring that sentiment. IE this is an intentional economic/power play. Is it not equally as likely that this is an intentional economic/power play but perpetrated by another government rather than our own? I just wanted you to see how joyous it is when all of the proof in the world means nothing in the face of some random conspiracy theory, and everyone else is a jackass because they dont immediately buy into your claims. Even the people who hunt bigfoot look for hair/tracks DNA, speak with people who claim they've seen something, etc. You've provided no data, actions, evidence, but it somehow is on equal standing with a countable number of bodies, data from hospitals, economic advisors and the models they've used for decades on a daily basis for any mundane reason.

People run away from talking with you because theres absolutely no reason to, your logic that you expect everyone to buy into defies common sense yet stands on its own with no evidence. If you declare the moon is cheese, it is so. You have no burden of proof, but the burden of proof on others is impossible because if it fits into the framework of the standard for collecting information and analyzing it, its somehow unreliable because thats what they want you to think. On top of that, you aren't particularly pleasant to talk to. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going NANANANA until the other party walks away doesn't make your points any less groundless, it just means you get to continue your conversation all by yourself. Look at BADecker, they're out there as well but people continue to entertain them because though the standard of proof is still impossible to present, at least every other word out of BADecker's mouth isn't, Sweet strawman you non sequitur logical fallacy, and righteous indignation.

Here is logic:
Assumption 1: Government wants you to continue paying your taxes and their salaries.
Assumption 2: They have plenty of employees to model different economic situations on retainer so they can decide economic policy.
Assumption 3: They have plenty of internal medical employees (CDC/FDA/NHS)

There is a deadly virus which we've both acknowledged exists. The government aims to maximize tax revenue to pay their salaries, compete in the global pissing contest that is, who has the highest GDPs/wealthiest countries etc. External medical personnel (in every country) said oh damn look at this virus, its bad, it'll cause X people to die and Y people to get sick. Internal government medical agencies see that information and go, yup that is right it looks like X people will die and Y people will get sick, here is what we should do (social distancing/shutdowns/masks). Trump administration that is not medical personnel says ok, we need to weigh X people dying and Y people getting sick with the economic damage that will be caused from the suggested measures. They get their wizards to model various scenarios and say, yup if we do this for this long, we'll lose $Z. So you compare the $ in X, Y, and Z and make a policy to minimize all three of those things.

So thats the logical course of action, why should we expect them to do that? Is it because we're government stooges? No, its because thats what their job is and whats in their best interest. The Berkeley economics major employed does not care a single iota about your rights, protecting them or taking them away. They don't get to hold your head down in the mud and make you eat worms whether they fudge the numbers or not. They just want to do their job and get a paycheck. Whenever I get my oil changed, I don't hugely worry about them using vegetable oil instead of motor oil, because the people working there have no reason to try to screw me over. The reasonable assumption is that people will do their job. Even if economics modeler A was disgruntled and secretly a spy sent to destroy our financial system, economics modeler B-Z6 would go, hey thats not right? So we've got this conclusion drawn by multiple medical professionals and multiple economics professionals that we should follow a certain plan to minimize the three concerns.

Nah, all of that logic is nonsense because the gubmint wants you to submit to them. We should assume they don't act on logic based on the resources they have available, and instead are just out to get us. They'll hurt their own wallets to tell people to stay inside. Medical researchers A-Z15 that are unrelated are just going to let lies pass through. Economics advisors who do this type of work on a daily basis are suddenly stricken with the brain dumb and are no longer competent to do their jobs. Economy is complex, so all of those forecasts that we've been doing all along are no longer able to be completed, and it is to be assumed that policy created is either a toss at a dart board, or an intentional act of destruction to... destroy themselves...?

On top of all of that, on the 1 in a trillion chance the US Government is actually doing all of this out of incompetence or malice, that would also imply every other country following the same plan is also doing this out of incompetence or malice. So we're now to either believe this is a global ploy, or that there is not a single competent government out there and every unrelated economics/medical team are all coming to similar conclusions absolutely by coincidence.

Nah, lets discard all of that and go with Communist ploy to take over the world. I spent 20 minutes writing a post, and rather than replying, "You see, here are the numbers that show X, Y, and Z, based on this model and as you can see at our current paces and projections, Z was always significantly higher. Don't forget the government also has voting interests in not letting people die over the economy" I'll get, YOU IDIOT GOVERNMENT STOOGE, THEY GOT YA! Some buzz words from debate club, and a rehashing of, they are out to get you so they'll act against their own interest in order to get you. If you question me or ask for more details, you're an idiot, and if you leave the thread because its pointless to continue as my words are gospel without a single iota of proof to my claim, you're running from the truuuuuth.

And I see you have totally given up on attempting to make any kind of logical argument and have gone full logical fallacy retard. At least you are exposing yourself for what you are this time instead of just pussing out and running away like you usually do when you give up.

That dumbass government sturgeon general says drinking alcohol when pregnant is bad. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!1! They just don't want you to know that drinking alcohol when pregnant will help sterilize the baby so they come out super healthy and non reliant on expensive procedures and medicines. If we didn't take their word for it, everyone would have to become medical personnel working in a maternity ward in order to confirm for themselves the effects of alcohol on unborn children. If everyone was a doctor, then no one would be. (gradually getting quieter) Booooooom.

On a related note, whats actually happening is China/Russia/etc is feeding false information to downplay the pandemic in order to trick you into thinking its not as bad as we think. That causes people to resent the shut down orders, sparking rebellion, and forcing the government to stop the shut down, leaving everyone sick so they can invade with less resistance. Its the ole fashion double screw, you think we're being setup by our own government, but its actually another government, setting up our government to setup us! Its the perfect plan! Because its a possibility, I'll just assume that my assumption is correct rather than the official story that can't be true because its official. Anyone that disagrees with me is a strawman, non sequitur, patsy.

Nice strawman. I never said all of this was fake. The virus is real. It is potentially dangerous. The reaction to it was more destructive than the virus ever will be. Only a small group need be willing participants. You know why? The world is filled with people who follow those who they perceive to have authority with little to no critical thought, for example you and SaltySpitoon. Ever heard of The Milgram Experiment? Only a small number of those involved need to be witting accomplices, the rest dutifully follow orders. As they like to say "I was just following orders."

"Listening to the Coronavirus 'Experts' Has Led to Death and Despair"

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/may/18/listening-to-the-coronavirus-experts-has-led-to-death-and-despair/

I'd have to agree with all of this, even if I'm someone who typically agrees with the fact that government is incompetent. I don't think that the government and policy makers (Republicans and Democrats) are going to just make large decisions like this willy nilly. No one is just going to decide, for partisan reasons, that they're going to try to kill the economy through making up a fake virus for a quarantine. This doesn't make sense at all because it's bullshit.

We do truly have a highly infectious virus on our hands that is killing people in the at risk categories (Older, Respiratory Issues, Heart Issues, etc) and others in some mysterious fashion.

Will medical experts and economic experts disagree on how they want to see the reopening happen? Yes, it makes sense on why they would -- medical experts are going to look at different things and economic experts are going to look at different things as well.

His resignation doesn't have much to do with it, except that you watch. He will find a better job in some vaccine company.

The fact that he has a model, all of such being imperfect, still needs more thought. It's three things about his model:
1. It was off farther than a game of craps could think of being off;
2. He claimed to have a computer program, which he hasn't shared, so it might not be there;
3. When he did share a computer program, computer experts determined that it couldn't be the initial program.

So, the point is that he is a fraud. Top policy is to tell the truth. People in government were stupid, they didn't get validation of what his model showed before they started to move on his predictions.

The big point is, many people all over haven't heard that he reduced his numbers drastically. So, whatever he is or was, his wrong numbers enhanced the stupid, fake pandemic in loads of ways, even if he recanted all of them later. That's essentially criminal activity on his part... breaking a public trust, accidental or intentional.

Niel Ferguson resigned because apparently he violated lock down orders to go make love with his mistress. A bit disgraced and bizarre circumstances but nonetheless, if we're talking about his model, it's a prediction. They aren't designed to be completely right and they are built within a margin of error. You feed a model with incoming data points which make extrapolations based on certain conditions. The conditions are always changing, so the model will always change.

A model is "hype guesswork", that doesn't take away credibility. Right now, the models support a U.S. reopening because incoming data points to a reduction in confirmed cases despite more testing as well as a reduction in the rate of deaths. Most likely a plateau of around 100k or so deaths will occur.

Oh am I? Good of you to tell me what my argument should be as you completely avoid addressing any of the points I made or substantiating any of your own arguments. Small portions and sub-sectors of the economy are forecast and modeled, not the entire macroeconomic system, and not regarding drastic unprecedented changes. You keep saying over and over again that people examined the effects of the lock down on the economy before it was implemented, yet you remain unable to substantiate this claim with any kind of documentation whatsoever. I guess your proclamation of righteousness is sufficient is it?

I am not talking about the concept of a lock down as an idea, I am talking specifically about utilizing it as a modern policy for emergency response, which I documented and you conveniently misdirected from with your whole historical analysis of the concept. All those other modern examples you gave were of minor regional areas, not a nation wide shut down barring businesses from operating. This is no comparison at all. You are trying to compare cooking a burger on your back yard grill with a global McDonald's corporate empire and pretending they are comparable.

This is not just incompetence, it is sold as incompetence. It is INTENTIONAL SABOTAGE FOR PROFIT AND CONTROL. The more emergencies created, the more people like you rush to the government screaming "Please! Please strip my rights to keep me safe!" Meanwhile massive corporate entities get to destroy their competition via shutdowns while they remain operational. Then when the waves of bankruptcies hit, they can buy up all of their real assets at fire sale prices. This also all has the added benefit of being able to blame decades of economic mismanagement on this outbreak instead of the real perpetrators responsible. No it wasn't us doing our fraud or the massive inflation we created destroying the economy, it was because that darned virus! A global economic reset was in the works for a long time. This was just the perfect pretext they needed to roll it out and start burning it all down while not resulting in street lynchings for those responsible for robbing us all blind. A disaster for one is an opportunity for another, but you feel free to keep believing there is no motivation for this planned economic implosion.

^^^ Top policy is to tell the truth. Neil Ferguson won't show us his initial computer program for his Imperial Model. He probably didn't have one, but just did a bunch of hype guesswork. Maybe it was intentional fearmonger work, and not guesswork at all. The program he got around to showing us was examined by experts who said that it wasn't the original. So, we still don't know if there was an original.

You're approaching this from the wrong angle, people don't just decide policy based on nothing, its not logical. The economy is as you said a finely tuned and complicated machine, but it is analyzed and forecast on a daily basis. Its not some mysterious entity that the people who've been analyzing it for 30 years are unable to draw conclusions on. The Trump administration employs these wizards that have a full time job of saying, hey we should impose tariffs to incentive this sector because we predict that this earthquake in Uzbekistan will have this effect on the sector. But you're right, its far more reasonable and likely to assume they're just throwing darts at a dartboard to decide economic policy.

Not that it matters, but the lockdown idea was first applied in the 1300s where the term "quattuor" (later quarantine) comes from, to curb the spread of the bubonic plague. Its been applied for hundreds of years because it does work. Canada did lockdown measures in 2003 to stop the spread of SARS. South Korea did the same thing in 2015 with MERS. The US did social distancing and closure of businesses where patrons couldn't distance themselves in 1918. Epidemics aren't all that rare, its just that the ones that we've had in the US in the past 100 years were more or less treatable with vaccines which isn't the case this time around.

Even if I was to entertain the idea of US Government incompetence and decided that you knew better how to manage the economy than the consensus of all of the people they employ, what about Canada? What about every other country in the world doing the same measures (albeit substantially more successfully than us). They all have different governments with different interests, yet their medical and economic advisors are more or less telling them the same things.

Do you actually have any evidence that so much effort was put into planning this response, or is this just a lazy appeal to authority logical fallacy again on your part? No one has the data or ability to model the macroeconomic effects of the shutdown, that is my point. I don't care how many experts you throw at it, the economy is a very finely tuned complicated machine flying down the highway at 120mph, and the shutdown just slammed it into reverse gear at full speed. Even if we can regain control of the vehicle the transmission is going to be destroyed.

Very good of you to tell me what my point is. What else is that called? Oh, right a straw man. My point is no one has the ability to model all of this effectively, and you have no evidence to support your claim that it has been examined in this way, in such detail, or even by economics experts. My point is even if they did, they still would not be able to do a good enough job to approach a reliable model. So far all I have seen are horribly inaccurate computer model based systems, not "millions of people who understand economics". This wasn't an economic policy, it was an emergency policy with economics as an afterthought at best. You like to imagine that government couldn't be so incompetent, but you have zero evidence to support your assertions.

What if I told you the lock down plan is based on a high school science project from 2006? What would you say then? What if I told you that experts in economics and medicine rejected the idea, but it was implemented anyway? What if I asked you to substantiate your claims with documentation? What other logical fallacies would you pull out to avoid admitting that you have zero logical arguments to respond with? There are people who have interests in seeing this nation fail for control and profit. Your inability to admit this and pretend like no one wants to see this happen is beyond ignorant. What will eventually be sold as incompetence is actually intentional sabotage, and it is enabled by millions of people just like you running to the warm embrace of the government when they tell you "we are here to help!". When you see the devastation that develops over the following years as a result of this policy, you just make sure you remember how vociferously you fought for your own nation's destruction.


"The 2006 Origins of the Lockdown Idea"

https://www.aier.org/article/the-2006-origins-of-the-lockdown-idea/




"Neil Ferguson's Imperial model could be the most devastating software mistake of all time "

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/05/16/neil-fergusons-imperial-model-could-devastating-software-mistake/

What kind of grass is that^^?

They are all reputable sources if they are second hand. It's the first hand sources that are not so reputable that we know of. Or have they all disregarded orders from Dr. Brix and the CDC? Did you get around to question them all on this?

The point is that we need to come to an agreement on a baseline source of information, otherwise none of anything either of us says matters. For all we know, it might be as low as a few hundred or less, or maybe over a billion. Perhaps Covid doesn't actually exist, or maybe it turns you into a zombie. Like I said, I just picked the CDC because its your government's official channel of information.

Pick any reputable source you'd like. If you are super concerned about the probable deaths being temporarily listed in the data, look only at the data thats a week old so that corrections are made. Or look at where the data is coming from where its still broken down into probable and confirmed cases and draw your conclusions from that. My state has it broken down this way

That's all a fantasy of fears inside a shell of hysterical ignorance wrapped in a cocoon of self righteousness inside your head.

A bit of stupidity on their part and slow movement is all I have to complain about.

You seem to be another one of those who buzzes all around the point, without actually setting down on it.

The point is the CDC lies and deception. When you tell people to say something other than the truth, you are lying, or at least deceiving. Same with the CDC. This is exactly what they did. And further, they said they would protect any lying medical people from prosecution if they lied about Covid deaths.


If a person's death cause is something other than Covid, call it whatever it is, not Covid, like the CDC is telling people to do.

If a person's death cause is unknown, call it unknown, not Covid, like the CDC is telling people to do.

If a person's death cause is unknown but Covid is present, call it unknown until what it was is determined to have been becomes known, not Covid, like the CDC is telling people to do.

In other words, the CDC has spawned all kinds of exaggerated lies about Covid and its death count. Because of this, nobody knows the true Covid death count. For all we know, it might be as low as a few hundred or less.

Sounds like a reasonable approach.

I love ya buddy, but you don't know anything about "science". We can observe the tiny little bad guys in the body with a variety of methods. You don't get labeled as having covid because you go to the doctor with a cough anymore than you get labeled as having tuberculosis. At the most extreme you'd get labeled as a possible covid patient while you're waiting for the test results. The published statistics have a breakdown of confirmed and probable cases, and a note that the numbers are amended as the test results come back positive for negative. I cannot explain the concept of testing to an extent that you'll understand or accept so I'm just going to have to move past that.

I'll certainly offer understanding for someone who wants to say, well I don't necessarily trust the CDC and point to contradictory information coming from another well respected medical facility. The point though is that there isn't contradictory information coming out, so I felt it was most appropriate to cite the CDC considering the thread is about Medical Experts within the Trump Administration. You can find the same information coming out of Johns Hopkins, NIH, Canada/European/Zimbabwe's public health agencies, so I'm more than willing to stop using the CDC as an example and switch over to data collected by any other reputable medical facility.

The Trump administration has both the manpower and expertise to collect the necessary information to make public statements. Relying on conclusions from people who don't have either is asinine. If you're able to find a reasonable motive that the government would take trillions in damage to lie, you can then look for dissenting opinions from respected medical facilities. In this case, the published information is corroborated by both the private and public sector in every country that has put public statements out. If you think that the US government is out to get you, get your information from Norway, they don't care about you in the slightest. If you want to chase this down some delusional one in a billion global scheme by a coalition of secret trillionaires that have the influence to manipulate 50 million people or so, let me know and we can have fun with it. I'll be the opposing side offering equally likely scenarios involving complete economic collapse, global anarchy, zombies, etc.

If you think the people making predictive models that are influencing the Trump administration's decisions aren't accounting for the amount of wear in people's socks as an indicator of economic distress, do it yourself.

When the CDC directs doctors and medical people to call it Covid if they don't know what it might be, or when it is Covid-like but could be any number of things, or when the doctor has determined that it is something other than Covid, or when it is somebody who died without a determined cause, that is a criminal, shyster, evil, wicked, lying approach.

If the CDC doesn't find the person who wrote those directives, and find something to try him for in a court of law, so that he gets 20 years to life, the whole organization is entirely evil. Those doctors and other CDC workers who are honest, should absolutely get out of their while they have any credibility left at all.

Move away from the CDC if you value your life, and don't have anything to do with any medical people who value the CDC.

I have not, but I have dealt extensively with Johns Hopkins and if you'd like to skip the CDC, I'd recommend them since they are one of the most competent medical institutions in the world. Though the CDC is just verifying Hopkins findings and regurgitating them to the public. I don't really have much opinion on the CDC at all, but the info that they're putting out isn't much different than that of any other country.

Ever dealt with the CDC directly?

Just curious. I have, and have a very low opinion of their ability to represent a trustworthy source of data and advice. Let me be more specific: I would strongly disagree that the CNC always, or generally, "represented the view or consensus of the medical community."

But that's just me.

^^^ A simple mistake in your thinking about government is that if it doesn't benefit them, that they might be honest.

Accidents happen. You remember the saying, "Give a monkey a typewriter, and he'll type a word sooner or later." It's the same with government. Give them control, and they will do something honest sooner or later.

But their whole goal is to get more control, even if they have to give up a little control, at times, to get it.

You are correct! Economics isn't my forte, so I rely on millions of people who do understand economics to create economic policy. I don't understand 100% of the Bitcoin code, so I rely on all of the other people who understand it to point out if there is a problem. What you call appeal to authority is just how humans overcome the fact that we don't live long enough to gather mastery of all subject matters. Every time you drive over a bridge without researching and understanding all of the structural properties, you are by your own definition "appealing to authority" by trusting the engineers who built the bridge to keep you safe.

I believe the government is here to screw us over when it benefits them. If it doesn't benefit them, I have no reason to believe that they're acting dishonestly. Again, it is in the government's best interest to aim for the best possible financial outcome. I do not have the manpower or resources to adequately collect the data to model the intersection between financial damage from the shutdown and projection of financial damage from unchecked Covid19. If you do, I'd completely unsarcastically love to see your predictions if you care to explain them. I don't wholeheartedly pledge my allegiance to the government, I acknowledge that it has the ability to coordinate efforts between large groups of people that do know what they're doing to collect the data necessary to make a plan. The entirety of your point is that we shouldn't trust the government because they're the government. its somehow a bad thing to listen to people who have expertise in something you don't. I trust the consensus of the medical community. I value the consensus of the business community. I believe that the government has the ability to use its own people to verify the consensus of the medical community (the CDC for example) to come to a decision about the outlook of Covid from the medical community (and its own economic advisors). It then takes that input, and crunches the numbers to come to a plan on the best possible solution. Why? Because thats their job... when people have a job to do, if they don't have any reason to do it dishonestly they typically dont.

As some one who is admittedly ignorant how our system of economics works, you seem rather assured that all these unnamed experts know what they are doing and some how are able to centrally plan out our economy on a macroeconomic scale on such short notice when all attempts to do so throughout all of human history have failed so spectacularly. It is almost as if you have no facts to support your argument and are relying completely on appeal to authority. Pay no attention to the economy crumbling around us, the government is here to help.

I bet they'll give it a try. I frankly don't understand how the federal reserve works. I share the sentiment of a lot of people here in thinking that fiat isn't stable, yet it keeps surprising me and managing to avoid the devastating effects common sense would leave you expecting through all of the recent rounds of quantitative easing, financial policy that I guess I just don't get, and other "strategic money printing". Fiat works just fine as a short term exchange medium I guess? My uninformed guess is that the fraction that was paid out to individuals in the stimulus bill will be used as an excuse to retrieve the full amount back in increased taxes, funneling money to buy corporate handjobs and lobby support, but I could be pleasantly surprised. Paying out 600 billion as an excuse to recollect 2 trillion seems like a good business model.

Most of those trillions printed stayed in Washington DC and or went to pretty big companies. You think maybe they could pull that off a couple more times?

Nah don't worry I'm on your side now actually. I'm down with putting on the plague mask and burning down houses with those infected inside of them to stop the infection like the good ole days when we didn't have medical professionals to boss us around. I don't actually trust that anyone knows how the economy works, so I'm just asking people how many times they've had money in the past week and relying on that rather than teams of experts with sophisticated modeling software that've been doing this for decades. Those jerks that make economic predictions based on billions of datapoints and millions of variables every week to determine what stocks to buy and advise the government on interest rates, and various other actions are witches as far as I'm concerned.

Things that actually help you?

Honorary degrees don't magically impart knowledge upon the recipient. Neither does recognition. Also there are accusations he stole a lot of the credit for the papers he published. Back to the Hitler analogy, he is probably one of the most recognized people in the world. Maybe we should dig up his bones and ask him how to handle it? Fauci is a politician, he is an expert on being full of shit like the vast majority of politicians.

Government is setting Fauci up in such a way that they have a scapegoat later if necessary.

Maybe as truth wasn't the right word. Because at the end of the day whatever Fauci says is his opinion, though I do think that he is an expert in his field and many other people think the same. Unsure on why you have such an issue with the guy, he's literally been in this position for like 40 years now. Tons of papers published in the topic, tons of recognition and honorary degrees, and so on.

What is a practicing physician going to help me with when I'm dealing with a global pandemic?

Not just "no but hell no."

I don't know any docs that think like that.

And he's not in any sense an expert in the medical field.

Talk to some practicing physicians.

Hitler had a lot of praise, I guess his sole intention was helping people too based on that logic.




Don't worry, SaltySpitoon assures me they have calculated absolutely all of this and have planned for every macroeconomic eventuality. Just ignore the imploding economy that could realistically kill hundreds of millions across the world. A few hundred thousand people with serious preexisting conditions may die, so it is totally worth it!

The interesting point about this has to do with politicians-liars. Most of us recognize that most politicians are liars by trade... just to get into office. I mean, when do they ever do what they promoted in their platform when they ran for office? And if they say that they were held back by the rest of government, they absolutely knew ahead of time that they would be held back. So, they were lying throughout their whole campaign.

The point of politician-liars is this. Being what they are, they easily recognize other liars when they see them. This brings us to the question about doctors, medical experts, and Fauci being liars. What do I mean? One of two things is happening:
1. The medical people are telling the truth;
2. The medical people are lying, and the politicians are going right along with them.

This means that we need to go to other places to tell if the medical leaders are lying. And that is exactly what we have done. We have a whole bunch of references right in this forum that show that the medical leaders are lying. Look at what TECSHARE, Tash, tvbcof, myself, and others have been posting. Simply click on our handles, go to the bottom of the page that comes up, and click on "Show the last posts of this person." Then click all the video links to see the medical lies.

The medical leader lies are important. But here is what is really important. THE GOVERNMENTAL LEADERS ABSOLUTELY KNOW THAT THE MEDICAL LEADERS ARE LYING. How do they know? They are liars themselves, and totally understand about lies and what goes into a liar and when he is lying and when he isn't.

It's this easy way that we can tell that there is a coup against the freedom of the people going on. And it is formal government that is doing it.

Article link? I'm guessing this is apart of a larger confirmed story.


100% I agree with ya. I've said this time and time again. Fauci isn't an expert in economics, but is an expert in the medical field and we should take what he says about the medical field as truth. It is up to the policy makers (politicans) to balance these out -- right again -- but I do think Fauci is trying to show the public that Trump is straying too far to the side of economics, and needs to come further to the middle to seek out that balance.

+Merited man.

People need to make a distinction between public policy makers and public health experts. As a public policy maker, they look at the experts to make informed decisions which mitigate risk in forming public policy. Dr. Fauci is an epidemiologist and MD, so of course he's going to say that there is risk in reopening the economy with increased infections and deaths. We knew this prior to his testimony.

A public policy maker needs to balance what scientists are saying and consider other factors that transcend medicine including the economy, including social issues, including education issues, ect. As a result of the economy being closed, suicide hotlines have increased their activity by nearly 900%. More kids are now reportedly missing meals, more kids are not going to the doctors to get vaccines, more parents are missing meals, and the economy will take over 10 years to recover. With schools being closed, some kids are going to experience reduced learning because their parents might not be able to teach them. The government has to consider all of these factors, not just the uptick in cases when reopening.

A doctor like Fauci has an expertise in one domain and his testimony is important. But only factoring increased transmission rates of coronavirus when considering opening the economy isn't the end all be all. There's more to it. When you reopen, you need a balanced approach with mitigation.

Now even the media is waking up to the fact that it can't hide the medical Covid scam any longer.

The real danger is the unemployment. Do you know how to manufacture your own gunpowder and reload your spent shells?


WAKE-UP, Donald! Your Malpracticing Doctors Are the Real Killers

When I see those "experts" obeying their own advice to the masses and not going to hair salons and getting haircuts because those places are closed (except for them) I might pay more attention to them.

Trump recently spoke to reporters and rebuked Faucis testimony, stating that he didn't agree with what Fauci had to say regarding opening the economy and that criticized his responses multiple times. I honestly don't see this as a winning strategy, people do want the economy open (everyone does!) but when you the experts in infectious diseases / medicine coming out and saying that if you are to go to fast, there is going to be unnecessary death and destruction, then I'd much rather side with the experts.

Slow walk the opening. Listen to science, and ensure that you're hitting the health metrics to begin opening the economy (like a place like NY has done) That's the best thing to do.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/politics/fauci-trump-coronavirus.html

You are reaching a conclusion based on reasonable premises but uncertainty in the data.

It does not pass a common sense test.

If there is any indecision about a fast opening, all they have to do is imprison and execute their so-called medical experts. Then there won't be anyone opposing their opening.

Trump is obsessed to ope the US economy in order to protect it from huge disaster.
There are already a lot of countries that stopped the measures and they see an increase in infections again. The disaster will come the one way or the other even it is an economic one or a hygiene one.

kids dont really like school and can learn from home.. so what i believe really is the big question about schools that most are concerned about.. who will babysit the kids so parents can go back to work

i believe the best option is for normal 'workbook' stuff kids can do remote learning. and only go into school to do 'practical' lessons thus only need a third of peoples in school at any time. which should allow social distancing layouts of classrooms.
but to still be reactive to any flare ups to avoid it becoming a full on hotzone
this ofcourse would cause alot of issues with childcare.
so secondary/highschool kids could to more remote learning as they are old enough to look after themselves (parents just put a banknote on the kitchen table to buy a pizza for dinner).
and make schools more manageable for the younger students in primary/elementary years to support the younger years to stay in hospital as much as possible.

i still think whether kids go to school full time or part time there will be a point of needing to manage the flare ups and using different facilities to 'babysit' kids. other wise the parents will find it harder to get back to work..

california only had 50 out of 3300.. (1.5%) forget the media whores that pretend 50%.. no 1.5%
yes when some midstates didnt get their counts of covid until feb-march. california has some in january.
and newyork had some in january..
france had a case on december 27th. from presumably imported from the chinese seafood market.

but id say you are pushing it if your saying november.. as the r0's dont match a november spread.. but do match the track and trace of the china imports to california in january . and the initially from france imports into newyork in january

but even so.. its about only a 1.5%-2.5% spread not 50%. so we are all around the world still at the start of the storm. not the end

Just a quick note - I believe this was in response to Fauci's assertion that the kids shouldn't go back to school until after we have a vaccine, eg stay out the whole year that STARTS august/September.

personally i dont think a blanket plan for every region fits. i think a lockdown an area if that area is a hotspot.
EG badeckers dumbzone of arizona could have stayed open a couple weeks before lockdown,

but then it becomes more pressure of getting that message out in press(national) that only applies to regional levels. it starts to send mized messages. such as badecker in dumb arizona thinking that arizona should be like far far away lands like sweden. and he and his cult friends want to protest and hug and lick doorknobs in anger to defy the advice given by his senator.

so although it would be good to do things more regionally.. the abundance of human stupidity and jealousy of other people in other places makes people not be sensible

take a look at sweden. they have relaxed rules.. so what did denmark population do.. cross the border so they can rub shoulders with people in sweden and now sweden is getting angry that more cases are imported from denmark.

in the UK the south west has the lowest case numbers.. but has the highest amount of 'fines' handed out for people travelling long distances into the south west. all because people think they can drive to a non hotzone if their area is a hot zone.. thinking they are escaping it. but in actual fact bringing it with them.
thus it just creates more hotzones.

....
as for the school kid question. yep its not about kids getting sick. its about one family having it. that kid gets it(no symptoms) and spreads it to 30 other kids(no symptoms) and next thing you get is 30 families getting it and the parents and grandparents being rushed to hospital in the following week or 2
also having 30 asymptomatic kids touching things older teachers touch. means teachers then get sick and need time off. causing the school to be locked dow because the school becomes a hotzone and needs to be sanitised

its much better to get the number down to numbers that are manageable.. then start schools again after summer break.. yep america's summer break is about to start anyway so no point sending kids to school just to send them back home in a couple weeks.
best to just leave it to august/september now

I do not think one can rationally discuss things like those bolded above until you have facts that explain differences in virus spread / rates between say, CA and NY.

There's some discussion about this virus actually having been around in Nov-Jan at least on the West Coast, and possibly a higher level of IGM/IGG responses there.

This is the only policy that will work.

It does not matter to this virus where people live.  It will infect all that it can.

Population density plays a role, however, human physical interactions are critical.

If you go back to the way of life before the lockdowns, the virus will spread very quickly, everywhere, including in Montana.

Having different policies for different areas based on their current points on the infection curve is short-sighted at best, IMHO.

Wearing PPE, social distancing is the only thing that will limit the spread.

Schools should be closed, and all gatherings should be banned until we get a reliable vaccine and vaccinate everyone.

We are in the early stages of this.  The way we are handling is criminal, IMHO.

The way things are now, we might not see the second wave until the next spring.

Do you think a one size fits all policy will work?

If Fauci says something that might be okay in NY, what about Montana?

Rand Paul is a complete idiot.  Mortality in children is irrelevant.  Community spread is relevant here.  How many older or overweight adults, parents/grandparents will these kids infect?

As for Fauci, he is an MD.  He graduated first in his class from Cornell. When you trained as an engineer, but you work as a CEO, you don't stop being an engineer.  He is an MD, always will be, it does not matter that he does not prescribe blood thinners to old people in your nearest walk-in clinic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Fauci

When he talks, he actually makes sense. Unlike all the other talking heads, democrats and republicans alike.

His honesty is infectious.

Fauci has been wrong a number of times and has relied on low quality models.

Here's Rand Paul debating with him, on the subject of reopening schools.

“Shouldn’t we at least be discussing what the mortality of children is?” Paul asked Fauci, adding that "the mortality between [ages] 0 and 18 in New York approaches zero. … So, really, we do need to be thinking about that. We need to observe with an open mind what went on in Sweden, where the kids kept going to school.”

“I hope that people who are predicting doom and gloom and saying, ‘Oh, we can’t do this. There’s going to be the surge,’ will admit that they were wrong if there isn't a surge. Because I think that's what's going to happen,” the senator continued, adding, “I think the ‘one size fits all,’ that we’re going to have a national strategy and nobody’s going to go to school, is kind of ridiculous. We really ought to be doing it school district by school district.”

“As much as I respect you, Dr. Fauci, I don’t think you’re the end-all. I don’t think you’re the one person that gets to make a decision,” Paul concluded. “But if we keep kids out of school for another year, what’s going to happen is the poor and underprivileged kids … are not going to learn for a full year.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/rand-paul-clashes-with-dr-fauci-over-reasonable-call-to-reopen-schools

Here's the REAL reasons Fauci wants a slow reopening. The virus will dissipate naturally within two years. Fauci needs the timing to be just right, to make it look like the new vaccine that he is working on with Gates, will make it to market and be distributed worldwide at exactly the time that the virus disappears naturally. This will make it look like it was the vaccine that did it, and more people will spend more money on more of his and Gates's vaccines.

It's all about money.

heres some facts

when you have a population of 320mill. and a disease that is 30% asymptomatic. 50% mild 20% severe
and you know there are not 64mill hospital beds.
and you know there is not 1mill hospital beds if progressing over a year.

then you know you cant allow it just to 'herd immunity spread' and let the hospitals take up the slack. because there is no slack.

instead with just 6mill people had it =4mill symptomatic meaning >2m severe means only 80k death risk because hospitals can cope(because the >2m is spread over 2 months not in one week)

but if you imagine them 6mill were not spread over 2 months. but instead were weekly numbers. there would not be beds for everyone and the >2mill severe per week wont get oxygen or medical care. meaning more deaths. and it still taking a year to spread(6m a week= over 52weeks)

stupid people think that 320mill americans must have had it by now.
they dont even think that only a few million have. meaning ~1%-2%  not 100%

think of all the hospital stress in march-early april at the peak. that was like 1% yet hospitals were stressed.

imagine herd immunity of 2-3-4-5-6%

too many ignorant people care more about fiat than human life. which makes them hypocrits to be on a bitcoin forum but think fiat means more than anything else

Poor facts, even very poor facts, would be a far better basis for decisions than a chained set of interdependent assumptions. Heard of joint probability? If 60% chance XYZ's sole intent is to help people, if 60% the praise he has is correctly placed, if 60% the guy's time in government gives him more wisdom, if 60% chance he hasn't lost the skill and perspective of a practicing doctor....

x = .6x.6x.6x.6 = 13%

Just like Airport Security Theater, we are dealing with Covid Theater. That is what Fauci has been and is creating.

In no way is it wise, required or important.

I mean I can assume the intentions of another, but both of us are just going to be shooting in the dark here. I know that. I just think with this amount of time this guy has been in government, and the amount of praise that he has, would make it clear that his sole intention is to try to help people. Maybe if the guy had worked in the private sector for sometime to just make some $$$$, and if he'd only been here for sometime I'd think different, but that's just not the case.

I mean yeah the guy isn't a practicing doctor, but what in gods name could my physician tell me that would stop the spread of the coronavirus? Wouldn't you want someone with the background in infectious diseases to be the guy that is leading the charge here?

Oh, to be honest with you I didn't even pick up on this when watching through some of the testimony. Might be because I have no background in compute modeling.

But when I speak about someone like Fauci and their intentions....
[/quote]

That's sort of where we start to disagree. You can't. You can ASSUME what someone's intentions may be, but you don't know. Assumptions are not facts.

It may sound trite, but someone's INTENTIONS might just be to talk. On international media.

Talk to any practicing doctor about the COVID matter. Someone who has been a government administrator for forty years does not speak for him.

Sure. You've made assumptions about the motives of people eg Fauci. I have a background in computer modeling. When he first started babbling about his "Models" I tuned him out as a complete idiot on the very subject he was purporting to advise as a medical professional. I'm qualified to say that. Make sense?

[/quote]

Oh, to be honest with you I didn't even pick up on this when watching through some of the testimony. Might be because I have no background in compute modeling.

But when I speak about someone like Fauci and their intentions, I'm saying that I think that as a medical professional and expert it is important to note that his advice on only that subject matter should be taken into account. I also don't think he should corrupt what he thinks about a particular topic with another variable - like the economy - as it has nothing to do with his background.

I do actually think the fact that he has been in government for so long, in the same position, as important - while others do not. This guy is not a politician, and isn't trying to be one. I don't see a reason for him to have some ulterior motives here. Guy has literally been under many different administrations, and has been doing the same thing all along.

If he was someone who was just picked under Obama, and there was a theory about him having it out for Trump because of x,y,z then I may have reason to look a bit further. But there's no reason to think this guy is just making Trump seem like a bad guy. At least IMO.

Sure. You've made assumptions about the motives of people eg Fauci. I have a background in computer modeling. When he first started babbling about his "Models" I tuned him out as a complete idiot on the very subject he was purporting to advise as a medical professional. I'm qualified to say that. Make sense?

His "information" isn't "from a medical point of view."

Not exactly sure what I've done wrong here, is there something in particular that you didn't like about my post or is there something that I've said that isn't factual here? Kinda want to make sure I know what you disagree with here before attempting to respond.

No to the above.

The reason is that because you have several assumptions there.

Fauci's been an administrator for 40 YEAR!!! Not a "medical doctor."

Not surprising to most people, but Anthony Fauci (and some other medical experts) testified remotely in front of the Senate panel for the Coronavirus and stated that they think that a slow reopening of the economy should occur, instead of rushing this. They warned that if we are to reopen too quickly, we're going to face death and illness that is unnecessary.

It's important to point out that when medical experts come to the Senate - and any body - to testify, the information they're going to provide is from a medical point of view. There is no reason for Fauci (or anyone in the medical community) to talk about the effects of this virus on the economy, they shouldn't change their opinion based on the economy. They should inform the public of what they think should be done from a medical point of view, and then we make a decision based on all of the other variables.

I understand the fact that people want the economy to come back, but I think there is going to be a lot of infections and deaths if we go about this too fast.

Another piece of news: California State Colleges/Universities (23 California State Schools) have said that they're going to be online for the fall semester. I'm expecting places that were hit hard like NY to do the same.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/us/coronavirus-live-news-updates.html

As always: Use this to get around paywalls (https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome)