Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:30 AM
Mangosteen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Namche Bazaar
Posts: 2,773

Six (Impossible) Conditions Before People in California Are Free


See link below.

Note that not one law was passed by the CA Legislature concerning these mandatory conditions. They were made by the Governor (Comrade Newsom) through an unconstitutional (both State & Federal) dictatorial edict.

No "non essential" businesses will be allowed to operate in the State of California until the Governor decides all six of these conditions are met.

No Nail & Hair Salons
No workout & yoga gyms
No sit down restaurants
No barbers
No clothing stores
The list of small privately owned businesses put out of business could go on and on.


https://theconservativetreehouse.com...g-the-economy/

(Could we all grow up and not try to shoot the messenger here and focus on whether these edicts are good for the State of California or maybe whether or not these edicts actually exist or whether or not they are in line with the Constitutions?)
__________________
Its only funny until someone gets hurt, then its fuckin' hilarious!
  #2  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:43 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,506
Tell us what these six conditions are. Then pick one or more of them and give us your opinion on them. Or give us your own criteria for opening up the state.
  #3  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:49 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,659
Yeah, I gotta admit. I'm not seeing a list of things. Still, I think it'll do better over in GD. Let me toss it that way for you.
  #4  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:49 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,659
Yeah, I gotta admit. I'm not seeing a list of things. Still, I think it'll do better over in GD. Let me toss it that way for you.
  #5  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:53 AM
TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 42,160
From the link, sans details:

(1) The ability to monitor and protect our communities through testing, contact tracing, isolating, and supporting those who are positive or exposed.
(2) The ability to prevent infection in people who are at risk for more severe COVID-19.
(3) The ability of the hospital and health systems to handle surges.
(4) The ability to develop therapeutics to meet the demand.
(5) The ability for businesses, schools, and child care facilities to support physical distancing.
(6) The ability to determine when to reinstitute certain measures, such as the stay-at-home orders, if necessary.

These sound fine to me as general guidelines. And if they are violating anyone's constitutional rights there's a system for dealing with that, a system this action does not impede in any way. Nothing wrong with everyone voluntarily cooperating.
  #6  
Old 04-15-2020, 11:16 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
(Could we all grow up and not try to shoot the messenger here and focus on whether these edicts are good for the State of California or maybe whether or not these edicts actually exist or whether or not they are in line with the Constitutions?)
They are good for California because it looks like things are turning a corner, and they are constitutional because the fringes of society canít string four coherent, factually based sentences together for why they are not.
  #7  
Old 04-15-2020, 11:40 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 29,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
(Could we all grow up and not try to shoot the messenger here and focus on whether these edicts are good for the State of California or maybe whether or not these edicts actually exist or whether or not they are in line with the Constitutions?)
FWIW, if you hadn't poisoned the well with the thread title alone ("impossible conditions" and implying that Californians are not free), your plea for considered debate would resonate more.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 04-15-2020 at 11:40 AM.
  #8  
Old 04-15-2020, 01:13 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 30,646
I'd like to see these "impossible conditions" in a less biased site. Are they listed on the state government website? And how do the rules in California compare to those in Republican-led states? Are they much different?
  #9  
Old 04-15-2020, 01:29 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
FWIW, if you hadn't poisoned the well with the thread title alone ("impossible conditions" and implying that Californians are not free), your plea for considered debate would resonate more.
Not to mention "Comrade Newsom." (Perhaps there should be an analogous term to Godwinning, for gratuitous comparisons to Communists.)
  #10  
Old 04-15-2020, 01:29 PM
SpoilerVirgin is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: An antique land
Posts: 7,488
It's a .pdf located on the California government website:

California's Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order
  #11  
Old 04-15-2020, 01:47 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
Tell us what these six conditions are. Then pick one or more of them and give us your opinion on them. Or give us your own criteria for opening up the state.
Here's an article from an actual news source, the San Francisco Chronicle.

The OP inaccurately characterizes these as "mandatory conditions." They are just guidelines for developing a plan for reopening. As a basis for planning, they seem good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen
(Could we all grow up and not try to shoot the messenger here and focus on whether these edicts are good for the State of California or maybe whether or not these edicts actually exist or whether or not they are in line with the Constitutions?)
Given that there are no "edicts" to discuss, but rather guidelines, this thread seems to be based on an entirely false premise.

I would suggest you would be better off getting your news from an authentic source rather than after being passed through a clearly biased filter.

Last edited by Colibri; 04-15-2020 at 02:08 PM.
  #12  
Old 04-15-2020, 01:51 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 13,717
I agree with all of these conditions. Avoiding peaks that overwhelm our health system is vital.


I'll just note that California has entered a pact with Oregon and Washington. All three states agree on these items and will decide together when and how to "re-open".
  #13  
Old 04-15-2020, 02:19 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 30,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoilerVirgin View Post
It's a .pdf located on the California government website:

California's Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
Here's an article from an actual news source, the San Francisco Chronicle.
Thank you for that. Now how are Republican-led states handling the question of how to re-open? What is Texas doing or not doing, for example, that's not raising the ire of the OP?
  #14  
Old 04-15-2020, 03:19 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 47,722
As a Californian over 65, these guidelines seem reasonable to me. I'm quite grateful to my county and the state for issuing the restrictions early.We are leveling out, and I can go to the grocery store, as needed, without being too worried.

I don't understand why some people want to put my life at risk so that they can go to the barber or eat in a restaurant. If I do get sick, maybe I can reward them with a nice big hug.
  #15  
Old 04-15-2020, 03:36 PM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 5,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
{...} I don't understand why some people want to put my life at risk so that they can go to the barber or eat in a restaurant. {...}
It's very simple.
You, and me, must die from an, almost, completely avoidable cause or certain people aren't '''free'''.

CMC fnord!
  #16  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:02 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,156
Thereís an old saying that goes something to the effect that your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. With Covid-19 gathering in public is metaphorically swinging your fist at someone elseís nose. A few people have come out and straight up admitted that they donít care about violating others rights in this situation (see Dan Patrick, Glenn Beck, and just today Indiana Republican representative Trey Hollingsworth). At least those guys donít deny what the underlying argument is. They care more about the economy than other peopleís right to life. Those who argue about opening the economy before a good plan is in place for dealing with the coronavirus are essentially making the same argument without openly admitting that they care more about the economy than the lives that Covid-19 would take in a massive outbreak.
  #17  
Old 04-15-2020, 10:52 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
OP wishes to reach the point of "nothing left to lose". If I say "count me out," is that a political jab?
  #18  
Old 04-15-2020, 11:15 PM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
How is someone "putting your life at risk" if they go eat at a restaurant?
  #19  
Old 04-15-2020, 11:46 PM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
As a Californian over 65, these guidelines seem reasonable to me. I'm quite grateful to my county and the state for issuing the restrictions early.We are leveling out, and I can go to the grocery store, as needed, without being too worried.

I don't understand why some people want to put my life at risk so that they can go to the barber or eat in a restaurant. If I do get sick, maybe I can reward them with a nice big hug.
Let me rephrase that since I was unable to edit. People don't want to put your life at risk and I don't see how they would be doing so if they went to the barber or a restaurant. I could see it if they insisted on hugging you and shaking your hand. But I've been socially isoated here for three weeks. If I'm putting someone at risk if I go out and get a haircut then social isolation isn't working.
  #20  
Old 04-16-2020, 01:47 AM
Smapti is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 16,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
How is someone "putting your life at risk" if they go eat at a restaurant?
They infect the couple sitting next to them, who infect their daughter when they go home, who infects me when she goes to work the next day and bumps into me.

"BUT MAH FREEDUM" is not a valid excuse for killing your neighbors.

!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
If I'm putting someone at risk if I go out and get a haircut then social isolation isn't working.
Unless your barber can cut your hair from six feet away, you're putting them at risk.

Last edited by Smapti; 04-16-2020 at 01:49 AM.
  #21  
Old 04-16-2020, 01:56 AM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
They infect the couple sitting next to them, who infect their daughter when they go home, who infects me when she goes to work the next day and bumps into me.

"BUT MAH FREEDUM" is not a valid excuse for killing your neighbors.

!

Unless your barber can cut your hair from six feet away, you're putting them at risk.
That's ridiculous.

If I am still gonna be infections after three weeks of sheltering in place, what is the point of hanging out in my house for three weeks? And I was never infectious in the first place.
  #22  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:04 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
That's ridiculous.

If I am still gonna be infections after three weeks of sheltering in place, what is the point of hanging out in my house for three weeks? And I was never infectious in the first place.
*sigh*
Can you be as certain that you're not simply asymptomatic?
Can you be as certain that none of the other patrons or workers at the restaurant are not infected?
Can you be as certain that none of the other patrons or workers at the hair salon are not infected?
How about all of the people that those patrons and workers have had contact with?

Until some period after a vaccine is widely distributed, the only way to contain the pandemic is through social distancing. Period. Pay attention to the epidemiologists and the doctors - this is what they're saying.
__________________
Salvator apiae.
  #23  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:21 AM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
*sigh*
Can you be as certain that you're not simply asymptomatic?
Can you be as certain that none of the other patrons or workers at the restaurant are not infected?
Can you be as certain that none of the other patrons or workers at the hair salon are not infected?
How about all of the people that those patrons and workers have had contact with?

Until some period after a vaccine is widely distributed, the only way to contain the pandemic is through social distancing. Period. Pay attention to the epidemiologists and the doctors - this is what they're saying.
If I'm asymptomatic then I don't have much of a viral load. I'm perfectly fine with not hugging anybody or shaking their hand.

I'm just not seeing how if I, say, go off to my dance class, and spend an hour in the studio with three other people and an instructor, none of whom I touch or even get that close to, then how is that risky? Or if it is risky then the risk is assumed by all of us and we agreed to it.

Hair salon, okay, they have to get closer. But if hair salons and restaurants are open I think people have to be free to decide whether they go to them or not, and if you're really afraid you can decide not to. Right now these things are not open so this is all conjecture.
  #24  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:48 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 2,303
"There's no use trying," she said: "one can't fulfill impossible conditions."

"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've fulfilled as many as six impossible conditions before breakfast."
  #25  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:50 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
That's ridiculous.

If I am still gonna be infections after three weeks of sheltering in place, what is the point of hanging out in my house for three weeks? And I was never infectious in the first place.
You seem to be laboring under the impression that businesses have been closed to protect you personally; when in fact it was to protect the population generally.

Arguing ďbut me me me me!!Ē means shit when the solution resides with all of us.
  #26  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:52 AM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 14,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
If I'm asymptomatic then I don't have much of a viral load.
If you say so, I guess. Are you a virologist?
Quote:
I'm just not seeing how if I, say, go off to my dance class, and spend an hour in the studio with three other people and an instructor, none of whom I touch or even get that close to, then how is that risky? Or if it is risky then the risk is assumed by all of us and we agreed to it.
If you're asymptomatic but have a viral load, you'll be huffing and puffing droplets filled with virus throughout the room. And your instructor will have been huffing droplets all week from his other clients.
Quote:

Hair salon, okay, they have to get closer. But if hair salons and restaurants are open I think people have to be free to decide whether they go to them or not, and if you're really afraid you can decide not to. Right now these things are not open so this is all conjecture.
People are bad at gauging risk, at least, we're very inconsistent about it, which is why these places have to be closed until it is actually safe. It's doubly bad for COVID because it's not just your own personal risk, but the risk you will unknowingly spread it to someone else. You don't have the right to decide to take on THAT risk.
  #27  
Old 04-16-2020, 07:02 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
If I'm asymptomatic then I don't have much of a viral load. I'm perfectly fine with not hugging anybody or shaking their hand.

I'm just not seeing how if I, say, go off to my dance class, and spend an hour in the studio with three other people and an instructor, none of whom I touch or even get that close to, then how is that risky? Or if it is risky then the risk is assumed by all of us and we agreed to it.

Hair salon, okay, they have to get closer. But if hair salons and restaurants are open I think people have to be free to decide whether they go to them or not, and if you're really afraid you can decide not to. Right now these things are not open so this is all conjecture.
Somewhere between 1/4 to 1/2 of infected people wonít have symptoms. Another 1/4 will have mild symptoms. Even those who will go on to have a severe case will have an incubation period where they were contagious but didnít know it.

Even if you are willing to assume risk for yourself, what about all the people that arenít but still have to be out and who could get it from you? Not just a dance studio but supermarket personnel, police officers, mail carriers, medical personnel, etc., all of who could then infect others. How do you think the virus reached pandemic status to begin with? Itís mostly because of the people with the virus, many without symptoms, who thought ďthis is no big dealĒ went on about there business as usual.
  #28  
Old 04-16-2020, 07:16 AM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,593
Breathing hard, like in a dance class, singing, like at church, or shouting like at a ball game TRIPLE how far infectious droplets travel.

TRIPLE! Look it up.

You’ll need to be 15’ apart for dancing or church etc.
  #29  
Old 04-16-2020, 01:20 PM
tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 41,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
And how do the rules in California compare to those in Republican-led states? Are they much different?
Governor DeWine of Ohio, (whom I personally do not much like), was one of the first governors to impose pretty much the same rules. Ohio has, so far, remained one of the better examples of not spreading the virus.
  #30  
Old 04-16-2020, 01:40 PM
D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Breathing hard, like in a dance class, singing, like at church, or shouting like at a ball game TRIPLE how far infectious droplets travel.

TRIPLE! Look it up.

Youíll need to be 15í apart for dancing or church etc.
Since this is Great Debates, please provide a cite for this assertion.
  #31  
Old 04-16-2020, 01:52 PM
elbows is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Since this is Great Debates, please provide a cite for this assertion.
https://youtu.be/gAk7aX5hksU

(The Dr in charge SKoreas effective efforts.)
  #32  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:34 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 47,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
Let me rephrase that since I was unable to edit. People don't want to put your life at risk and I don't see how they would be doing so if they went to the barber or a restaurant. I could see it if they insisted on hugging you and shaking your hand. But I've been socially isoated here for three weeks. If I'm putting someone at risk if I go out and get a haircut then social isolation isn't working.
Everyone else has got it, but in my case particularly while I'm at home almost all the time I still need to go to the grocery store once a week, and the more the other people at the store have hung out the greater the chance of one of them having it and transmitting it to me.
Plus, you seem to have the notion that the virus spreads only by touching.
California, despite being early in getting people with infections, and having lots of contact with China before we knew there was a problem, is 30 out of 50 in Covid19 deaths. We have spare ventilators we are lending to other states. I think there have only been 15 deaths in all of San Francisco, which is more densely populated than the suburbs like where I live.
Closing down fast worked. The restrictions work. I don't know what more evidence people want.
  #33  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:36 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 47,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
Governor DeWine of Ohio, (whom I personally do not much like), was one of the first governors to impose pretty much the same rules. Ohio has, so far, remained one of the better examples of not spreading the virus.
I think Maryland is another good example of a with-it Republican governor. Maybe the problem isn't Republican or Democrat, it is more pro-science vs clueless about science.
  #34  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:44 PM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
You seem to be laboring under the impression that businesses have been closed to protect you personally; when in fact it was to protect the population generally.

Arguing ďbut me me me me!!Ē means shit when the solution resides with all of us.
You seem to be saying that I am not part of the general population.
  #35  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:50 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
You seem to be saying that I am not part of the general population.
Iím saying that youíre only thinking of yourself, which I thought was clear enough. Not sure how you can misunderstand my simple point.
  #36  
Old 04-16-2020, 02:57 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,589
Quote:
(5) The ability for businesses, schools, and child care facilities to support physical distancing.
Anyone have any ideas on how long it'll take to double the number of schools in California?

And I'm pretty sure that any governor who was pro-science would have followed the CDC guidelines, and Ohio sure as heck hasn't.
  #37  
Old 04-16-2020, 03:02 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
You seem to be saying that I am not part of the general population.
You seem to not understand that you are.
  #38  
Old 04-16-2020, 03:05 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28,143
#MurderedByWords
  #39  
Old 04-16-2020, 03:13 PM
D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
https://youtu.be/gAk7aX5hksU

(The Dr in charge SKoreas effective efforts.)
I'm not watching a 36 minute long video.
  #40  
Old 04-16-2020, 03:24 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 13,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Thereís an old saying that goes something to the effect that your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. With Covid-19 gathering in public is metaphorically swinging your fist at someone elseís nose. A few people have come out and straight up admitted that they donít care about violating others rights in this situation (see Dan Patrick, Glenn Beck, and just today Indiana Republican representative Trey Hollingsworth). At least those guys donít deny what the underlying argument is. They care more about the economy than other peopleís right to life. Those who argue about opening the economy before a good plan is in place for dealing with the coronavirus are essentially making the same argument without openly admitting that they care more about the economy than the lives that Covid-19 would take in a massive outbreak.
Bolding mine.

There's no shortage of these idiots. Today Dr. Oz showed his ass by saying we could re-open schools because there was only a 2-3% mortality rate and those lives would be an acceptable loss.

We're going to hit 60K+ deaths on this, and that's dramatically under-counted due to a lack of testing. Sure, let's re-open. What's the worse that could happen?
  #41  
Old 04-16-2020, 04:27 PM
Shalmanese is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Shenzhen, China
Posts: 7,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
I'm just not seeing how if I, say, go off to my dance class, and spend an hour in the studio with three other people and an instructor, none of whom I touch or even get that close to, then how is that risky? Or if it is risky then the risk is assumed by all of us and we agreed to it.
Are you not familiar with the Washington Choir cluster?

On March 6th, 60 people attended a choir practice, all of them were free from symptoms, all used hand sanitizer and refrained from touching one another at all. 45 people in the group got infected and 2 were dead as of March 29th.

Or the Bluff wedding cluster in New Zealand.

70 people attended a wedding on March 21st, nobody reported any symptoms, everyone used hand sanitizer and tried to stay as far away from each other as possible. A week later an air steward who attended the wedding came down with symptoms and was confirmed positive. Of the wedding party, 21 of the 23 members tested positive. As of now, 92 cases have been linked to the cluster (including secondary chains of transmission) and the father of the groom as well as one other person is dead.

I could continue to list clusters all day long, in South Korea, there are cases that are linked because two people rode in an elevator together for 1 minute. If you "don't see how it's dangerous" by now, you're just not paying attention.
  #42  
Old 04-16-2020, 04:46 PM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
My point is that if the barbershops etc. are open, it is not an act of sabotage to go and get a haircut (or whatever). They've been closed for almost a month, people have been staying home for almost a month. If, after a month of isolation at home, people are still wildly contagious in public, then isolation has not worked. I think it's pretty clear that we can't go on like this forever.

There will still be some risk when things are open, and most people can assume that risk or not and stay home. Right? But if they don't stay home, at that point, they are not risking other people any more than they're risking their own health.
  #43  
Old 04-16-2020, 04:55 PM
Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shalmanese View Post
Are you not familiar with the Washington Choir cluster?

On March 6th, 60 people attended a choir practice, all of them were free from symptoms, all used hand sanitizer and refrained from touching one another at all. 45 people in the group got infected and 2 were dead as of March 29th.

...
Well on March 24 four people attended a dance class, all used hand sanitizer and nobody touched anybody else. [Also the dance instructor noted that the studio had been cleaned and "how often does that happen?"] As of yesterday all four of us were still symptom free and attending the class via Zoom.

If I am out walking and I wave at someone across the street I am nowhere near hitting their nose with my fist.
  #44  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:06 PM
Shalmanese is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Shenzhen, China
Posts: 7,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
My point is that if the barbershops etc. are open, it is not an act of sabotage to go and get a haircut (or whatever). They've been closed for almost a month, people have been staying home for almost a month. If, after a month of isolation at home, people are still wildly contagious in public, then isolation has not worked. I think it's pretty clear that we can't go on like this forever.

There will still be some risk when things are open, and most people can assume that risk or not and stay home. Right? But if they don't stay home, at that point, they are not risking other people any more than they're risking their own health.
If the R value for this stays below 1, the number of new cases steadily dwindles every day until there's almost no risk. If the R value is above 1, the daily new cases rise until we reach the point where almost everyone has it. Every activity that creates a new infection path adds a little bit to the R value. Some activities are absolutely unavoidable like doctors going to the hospital to treat patients or going to the grocery store to get food. Every little thing adds to the R value until it inches up above that threshold.

But the crucial thing to understand is that if the true number of daily new cases drops far enough, then we can start implementing test & trace which takes a big whack to the R value. Once you roll out test & trace, you can relax a lot of the other restrictions without nudging R over 1. But for test & trace to work, we need somewhere around a 100:1 - 1000:1 test to true daily new cases ratio. Given we're currently around 160,000 tests/day now, that means we need to get down to ~1600 - 160 new cases per day OR drastically increase testing capability and ideally both.
  #45  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:20 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 28,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
They've been closed for almost a month, people have been staying home for almost a month. If, after a month of isolation at home, people are still wildly contagious in public, then isolation has not worked.
Uh, why do you think that the number of cases in the US continues to climb despite ďpeople staying at home for almost a month?Ē Do you think that it everyone had not stayed at home, we would have a similar number of sick people as we do today?
  #46  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:39 PM
What the .... ?!?! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 4,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
The OP inaccurately characterizes these as "mandatory conditions." They are just guidelines for developing a plan for reopening. As a basis for planning, they seem good.

Maybe I didn't understand correctly, but on the Today show this morning I heard the word "must" associated with six conditions and California.

Last edited by What the .... ?!?!; 04-16-2020 at 05:40 PM.
  #47  
Old 04-16-2020, 05:46 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangosteen View Post
Note that not one law was passed by the CA Legislature concerning these mandatory conditions. They were made by the Governor (Comrade Newsom) through an unconstitutional (both State & Federal) dictatorial edict.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...er=7.&article=

As to whether the US Constitution recognizes a state's emergency override doctrines, I'll grant that it probably would require a lot of "reading between the lines" to support, but that the Supreme Court would probably allow it.

We do, after all, live in a world where the Right to Free Speech goes away if you cry "fire!" in a crowded theater and where you are not allowed to purchase your very own nuclear missile, despite the second amendment.

The Framers didn't expect people to follow the Bill of Rights right off the edge of a cliff. There are some places where things get sufficiently insane that the Supreme Court has decided that they'll ignore the Bill of Rights. The invention of the concept of a Federal emergency power is just such an example.

It seems difficult for the Federal government to say that they're allowed to have the concept but that the states aren't and particularly when the Federal government is intended to leave domestic concerns to the states, where possible.
  #48  
Old 04-16-2020, 07:07 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by What the .... ?!?! View Post
Maybe I didn't understand correctly, but on the Today show this morning I heard the word "must" associated with six conditions and California.
You believe the Today show to be an official government source?
  #49  
Old 04-16-2020, 07:41 PM
nightshadea is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 6,445
you know here's what someone needs to figures out how to do ...... make every moron who thinks he's above it all sign a wavier saying 2 thing :

1. if there not going to take precautions and such fine ..... but if they get it the only right they have is to get over it themselves with no public medical help what so ever so the only right they have is to die in the street

2 the state has every right to use the laws that they use against people who knowingly pass on infectious/fatal diseases (like HIV ) against them meaning if you get someone sick its assault at the very least and manslaughter or negligent homicide at the most

If they have the balls to sign that I say Godspeed and good luck

Last edited by nightshadea; 04-16-2020 at 07:42 PM.
  #50  
Old 04-17-2020, 07:34 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
People of California are free to do all sorts of stupid stuff and most likely won't be noticed by LEOs unless flagrant. So don't be flagrant unless dim-witted. Don't post videos of doing flagrant stuff. Don't brag. And don't approach me too closely. You won't like my response.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017