Ts and Ps
Comments
-
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid. -
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid.
-
Chins up for your epic trolling of @HHusky in this thread. He feels it’s a real breakthrough moment. As @Houhusky said, Lionel could have driven to the Midwest to save his failing business.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Damn straight, keep free-thinking.HHusky said:
I just don't have the option of waiting to see whether the Midwest and the West Coast get moved closer together.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Oh, interesting. Well, I'm sure your motivations were pure. Free-thinkers like us will keep making the decisions best for us. Those travel radii are for people who don't know better anyhow.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it. -
@Hhusky clearly had an important task to accomplish, otherwise he wouldn't have ignored science-based guidelines. Good for him to make his own risk assessments. How he got where he was going it entirely his own affair.NorthwestFresh said:
Chins up for your epic trolling of @HHusky in this thread. He feels it’s a real breakthrough moment. As @Houhusky said, Lionel could have driven to the Midwest to save his failing business.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Damn straight, keep free-thinking.HHusky said:
I just don't have the option of waiting to see whether the Midwest and the West Coast get moved closer together.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Oh, interesting. Well, I'm sure your motivations were pure. Free-thinkers like us will keep making the decisions best for us. Those travel radii are for people who don't know better anyhow.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it. -
More to the point, Ivan wanted a "gotcha" and leapt to conclusions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid. -
Amen. There's way too much of that these days. We must have the decency to trust people to make their own decisions.HHusky said:
More to the point, Ivan wanted a "gotcha" and leapt to conclusions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid. -
Top-notch trolling. If only I could give more than my one Chin. @HHusky feels validated now by some Rando interweb guy.GrundleStiltzkin said:
@Hhusky clearly had an important task to accomplish, otherwise he wouldn't have ignored science-based guidelines. Good for him to make his own risk assessments. How he got where he was going it entirely his own affair.NorthwestFresh said:
Chins up for your epic trolling of @HHusky in this thread. He feels it’s a real breakthrough moment. As @Houhusky said, Lionel could have driven to the Midwest to save his failing business.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Damn straight, keep free-thinking.HHusky said:
I just don't have the option of waiting to see whether the Midwest and the West Coast get moved closer together.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Oh, interesting. Well, I'm sure your motivations were pure. Free-thinkers like us will keep making the decisions best for us. Those travel radii are for people who don't know better anyhow.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it. -
No. We've seen where that leads.GrundleStiltzkin said:
We must have the decency to trust people to make their own decisions.HHusky said:
More to the point, Ivan wanted a "gotcha" and leapt to conclusions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid.
-
You’re being trolled so hard and you don’t even know it.HHusky said:
No. We've seen where that leads.GrundleStiltzkin said:
We must have the decency to trust people to make their own decisions.HHusky said:
More to the point, Ivan wanted a "gotcha" and leapt to conclusions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid. -
Like, to the Midwest?HHusky said:
No. We've seen where that leads.GrundleStiltzkin said:
We must have the decency to trust people to make their own decisions.HHusky said:
More to the point, Ivan wanted a "gotcha" and leapt to conclusions.GrundleStiltzkin said:
I know, it's weird, that someone who knows nothing about you or your situation can have any opinion on whether it's safe for you to engage in activity. I just don't understand that thinking.HHusky said:
You probably don't really know anything about the matter.Houhusky said:
If it didnt matter if you or one of your "little people" went then it probably didnt matter if anyone physically went there at all.HHusky said:
I think Jay and I are okay. Wearing a mask is just common sense and I'm not traveling unnecessarily.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Legally, perhaps not. You did, however, go against Inslee's science-backed guidelines meant to keep us safe. I won't tell, like you, I think he's kinda full of shit too. I didn't wear a mask until it was legally mandated, just like you, I'm sure.HHusky said:
If the matter I'm attending to had been proscribed, the task wouldn't have to be attended to. But it wasn't, so someone has to accomplish the task.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Who gets to say whether it is or isn't optional? Many options have been proscribed from many people.HHusky said:
The task isn't optional. The only question is whether I do it or someone else does it.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Backed by science, the Governor has told his citizens to #StopTheSpread, #StayHomeStaySafe. I can't remember what the safe travel radius is, but certainly less than a commercial flight. You freely disclosed that you felt it was permissible for you to ignore those guidelines. And I defend your right to do so.HHusky said:
I didn't refer to my employees as "little people". But you know better than I do whether travel is optional in my life.NorthwestFresh said:
What do you get as a positive about viewing employees you obviously don’t have as your “little people?” If you do, they should know they are employed by a sociopath. Guessing you view your wife as a subordinate, too.HHusky said:
How was the article I linked an anti-Trump piece, Boris? In your own words.NorthwestFresh said:
Boris the Copy/Paste Lightweight links from an anti-Trump rag. No wonder your business is going under. Early retirement looming.HHusky said:https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/we-need-to-confront-reality/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=first
People understandably contend that a person who is diagnosed with the coronavirus, but dies of a separate health issue, should not count as a “coronavirus death.” (For example, George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.) The oft-cited death number probably involves certain elderly patients who were likely to die from any significant stress to their health.
But just as there’s evidence for an overcount, there’s even more evidence for an undercount. A lack of available tests in the early days meant that certain deaths that were probably connected to the virus were never officially diagnosed. The overall U.S. death toll from the start of the pandemic jumped — way higher than the official death toll from the virus: “The 781,000 total deaths in the United States in the three months through May 30 were about 122,300, or nearly 19 percent higher, than what would normally be expected.”
. . .
We can quibble with this or that aspect of the data. I think that if you account for all of the errors and factors that can lead to overcounts and undercounts, it’s more likely we’re undercounting the deaths than overcounting. But even if you assume that one out of every ten official deaths is miscategorized, and shouldn’t be counted as a coronavirus-driven . . . the death count this morning is past 141,000. If the real count is closer to 127,000 . . . how much does that change your perception of the problem? What does the country’s total number of deaths need to reach before everyone will concur, “Wow, this is really bad”? What do you have to see to conclude that it’s not a hoax, that the CDC and doctors are not lying, and that the threat this virus presents is not overhyped?
Because if the answer is, “Nothing will ever convince me of that,” . . . well, then we are no longer discussing what is actually happening; we’re discussing something akin to an article of faith.
No sense arguing, we agree that individuals are best suited to make those judgments for themselves. Central planning just isn't suited for it.
You also could have atleast driven and significantly reduced the number of people you came in contact with.
Your flights weren't essential, you just deemed it more important than the likelihood of you infecting someone else with the deadly serious Vid.
