TrickstaPriest

I literally worked with CPMAB and the CPBC out of AZ. The people they work with know how to manage fires, foliage, and so on. They don't exactly hide their knowledge with their partners in other states as far as I know. So I'm immediately dubious on some of those claims. But there may be exceptions? Policy, leadership, communication, experience... also, they have like no money.

Something relevant:

Ever so relevant: http://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/a-wdix-special-report

I must have overlooked that - I read through a large portion of it. I just know how it's managed in my area. I'll dig into it again for that portion, because that part I found confusing.

That's pretty wild. It's pretty common known environmental policy to cull certain types of animals, make controlled burns, clear brush... etc.

I mean... in terms of laws, class privilege is key. In terms of societal treatment, you can hide your class and background and accent and more... but not your skin. So it depends on topic

White Privilege sessions? In which class? I went to school in Canada, so this is completely alien to me.

I had a response here, but I've deleted it. I don't feel comfortable ranting at someone, even if they don't fully understand where I am coming from.

But the situation for that moving forwards is unlikely. We have justices (vying for Supreme Court) literally suggesting we use the army (not the NG) against protesting cities, and that we 'give no quarter' - Tom Cotton, in this case. This is the literal argument for someone, vying for the highest position in Justice, that's being actively considered for it (among others). Because the one thing that'll make our country safe again is millions upon millions of dead, murdered citizens, many of them desperate and/or homeless (I can't imagine why). This will never happen. People have to actually admit to themselves that, despite all the political chicanery against their loved politician, he's still actually not good. That someone can slander their favorite and be wrong, but their favorite still be terrible. That their 'hated enemy', hated even more than foreign countries, is their own countrymen, and the primary reason they hate them is the people on the radio/TV told them to hate them. This is the state of politics in this country and why I always hammer at the people on TV/radio. They've singlehandedly brought this country to ruin. There are people who want to be reasonable but are just angered at being argued with. Like, the common complaint is 'well X is just as bad', or 'don't try and push your anger/politics on me'. But there will be a quarter million dead by the end of the year, numerous bankrupt/starving/homeless, tens of millions probably, and nearly a catastrophically broken economy, because our administration at every level is desperately advocating all of its responsibility. It doesn't want to do -anything- but run for re-election. That's not politics, that's dysfunction. That doesn't mean I care about your vote and am trying to hijack it, it means people's suspicion and loyalty is so great that our citizenry are willingly overlooking the mishandling of an incident until it became probably the greatest catastrophe our country has had since the literal civil war. It means people hate being argued against (and indeed, sometimes by idiots or asshats on 'the other side') so much that they are willing to tear apart or let their country literally collapse... rather than admit that those asshats might have a real point right now. That's literally why this country won't recover from this pandemic, and will effectively go from the strongest country in the world into one of the poorest, ruined, 1st world nations. While clinging to their idols all the way down.

We had our chance to. But the alternative to not trying to contain it at all is literally million plus dead, so... finding the middle road is actually the best option. Good luck.

If he was interested in just preventing a (non stock market) panic, there's a million ways to acquire and push masks, and then encourage people to wear masks. Because of the nature of a growth of a pandemic, it would have been almost trivial to save a third of the lives lost so far, if not half. The literal 'anti mask movement' that exists in this country has been fanned by Trump and Fox. When I literally heard Trump on TV talking that this pandemic was a 'hoax' I thought it would be the literal death of his party. I can't understand politics in this country anymore. People can blame politicization, but Trump went above, beyond, and probably destroyed the economy of this country for a generation and ended more citizen's lives than any event in my entire lifetime. People are angry at a lockdown, and I agree making sure people don't end up homeless and starving is vital (and literally the responsibility of our government right now), but this lockdown would have been lightened months ago if the pandemic was treated appropriately. Yet people are blaming the situation on treating the pandemic as serious. It's the rationale of 'How dare you tell me to treat this minor cancer as something to be treated. Well, I ignored you and then put it off and now I have to get chemotherapy! Don't you dare tell me that I should treat it seriously, it's your fault its stage 3 now.'

Thanks for the reply on this! I appreciate the callout, I was wholly like "I thought I posted this calculation like four times now!" but patience is a virtue, and I figured later that you may have been using whole-world fatality rates.

0.0075 * 330 million = 2.475 million by today's standards. There was already about 101 million during the 1917s from what I saw, and it killed roughly 750k, give or take. So any number beyond 3 times that is unlikely. 1916 101,961,000 1.41%

Yeah, unfortunately I haven't seen any large sample tests on this, so I've been avoiding talking about that for now.

Scott Adams is doing the things that make me hate on the level of AM.

Yep. Same with how I look at the 1% fatality rate - that's 1% with access to modern medicines and hospitals, which would be among the first things you'd lose when you have 40-80 million seriousish cases. Just the act of attempting to triage that to decide who really needs medicine (which would need to be taken for potentially a month, so access to perhaps 21-30 pills per person) would be a nightmare, let alone who gets an actual hospital room. I should add, the interview I am referencing was in the last couple of days. So this is a recent dialogue of his.

There's the fox interview with Laura Ingraham where Trump directly goes on about that (for at least a tiny bit). "Once you have a 'certain number' [of people infected], it is going to go away." https://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vk/herd-immunity "Herd immunity only works if most people in the population are vaccinated (for example, 19 out of every 20 people need to be vaccinated against measles to protect people who are not vaccinated). If people are not vaccinated, herd immunity is not guaranteed to protect them. Vaccination rates are high in the UK as a whole, but this hides the fact that rates are much lower in some parts of the UK and in some communities." So that "certain number" is like 70-95%, and people are (incredibly shockingly generously) saying with a 1% fatality rate (as if hospital coverage would actually exist with tens of millions would sick) that would still be millions. I'd say closer to ten million. It might take a whole year to get there or so, but. FWIW, since Spanish Flu had an overall 0.75% mortality rate, herd immunity at only 75% and a 1% fatality rate would still be exactly on point.

It seems like a lot of people are willing to say 'lets just say eff it and find out what happens'. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/compare-flu-pandemic-1918-and-covid-19-caution-180975040/ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53088354 Shared for the maps. To give people an idea of what I'd expect to happen. I already have at least one friend who insists its just the flu. It's fortunate he works in an almost entirely empty office, and has no kids. It's like people literally don't understand what doubling is, and how preventing doubling will make the situation look tiny in comparison. There's a limit to how many times it'll straight double, but I already posted the math on how "herd immunity" would work. And that 8 million dead is a conservative estimate (as pointed out by people literally on this thread). My point in this rant is that if this continues, it could get really bad. We can try to rely on people 'acting smart', but as I posted before... this is the exact thing that humanity is bad at. We aren't evolved for this, and we'll get slack very quickly. In an extremely Rural area, that doubling is slow (and that punishment for being slack is thus slower as well). But in any dense city, that doubling will result in another NYC event.

I mean, I was being very, very generous at saying 3%. Even that much would kill three times as many people as the Spanish Flu, mostly due to spread and complete shutdown of resources. Naturally people will begin to take further precautions... but those who have to work will work. And like my coworker and his girlfriend, could get a full fever that lasts a literal month (his and her temp didn't go down for ~28 days). If he hadn't been working from home, literally everyone in my office building would have gotten it within a month. There's no way his sick time could cover a full month. It could still take a few months to go wide, but a re-opening would pretty much crush every hospital in the country. It would just take a couple extra months to hit the really rural parts... as we saw the first time this went around. So figuring out what we can do is kind of figure out where we are at and what we can do... after being at this for almost six months. No joke, I was already preparing for coronavirus in the mid weeks of Feb. Even my worst realistic expectations have been blown away by the sheer hubris of our government, however.

Ah, I see that, but its because this hits (edit:more) older people than younger people. And the argument being made is somewhat incorrect. The argument isn't how much covid killed when it's badly under control versus how much died from suicide and starvation, it's how much covid would kill when it's not tried to be controlled versus... It's not a linear growth with infection, otherwise this kind of damage assessment is easy to control. It's explosive growth, and it could have easily killed tenfold what it has so far. That's not even a slight exaggeration - it would take a 90% infection rate to get it to slow down, and at roughly a 3% fatality rate (when overburdened), it would mean 2.7% * 330 million deaths.

How much did the rate of suicide increase by, compared with last year?

Pardon. I posted people investigating it, but not the thing itself.

This retaliatory behavior is a big part of this larger problem, PD essentially acting as a crime syndicate. If we want to talk about olive branches and trust, things like this are absolute cancer to trust.

I heard about it a few days ago from my contacts, but nothing on news. I took a look at the satellites - the scar runs almost the length of the state from what I saw. I pay pretty special attention to environmental and disaster events - I've had a running theory for the past ten-fifteen years (started based on New Orleans nearly disappearing off the map) that we are going to hit a pretty soon where states/the fed largely abandons locations hit by disasters. Basically forcing people to fend for themselves and creating thousands (and eventually millions) of in-US refugees. I hope people directly impacted by this get some sort of aid. It's awful, and doesn't surprise me (except only in that it's happening now and not ten more years out).

These are more cases where the kid came home sick. Was bumped from school. I'm more commenting on this to illustrate how fast this happens. I think they've been going back for less than a week at this point...