Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I laughed out loud at this part of that time article.

So the story that had gone viral simply wasn’t true: the teenager did not go to an urgent care clinic and he wasn’t uninsured. But one reason the story exploded on social media is that it felt emblematic of a broader, societal failing because it easily could have been true.

So very Trump, even if from the other end of the spectrum.

Posted
47 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

 

P.S. You'll note that there are almost no dates in that video. I can't imagine why that would be (oh yeah, it would give context). 

The first clip stating the risk to NY is low is dated Feb. 2, almost a full month before Trump was claiming the rising level of concern was a Democratic hoax on Feb 28.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Trump will never get credit from the TDS deranged lunatics on this board.  But the majority of Americans will consider it a huge win if the current model projection of 60,000 deaths comes to fruition.

Credit for what? Local leaders filling in the gap left by his lack of leadership?

  • Like 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

If Trump comes out and drives hysteria in the US during the impeachment process, he'd get castrated for trying to create an event to avoid impeachment -- especially when at the time WHO was saying there was no person to person transmission.  Fauci and the CDC were telling everyone in late February the risk to Americans was low.  Isn't Adam Schiff chair of the intelligence oversight committee with access to intelligence?  Maybe had he spent time on the intelligence role instead of an impeachment that did not even allege a crime and had zero chance of removing the president, things would have been different.

If we get out of this with 60,000 deaths as is now modeled, that is a huge win for the country.  And there will be a lot of credit going around to federal, state and local governments.

Stop.

 

  • Like 5
Posted (edited)

Black Swan events as we know them consist of the three components. I see the third component a lot on this board:

1) Impossible to predict

2) Wide-reaching and wide impact of consequences

3) People will try to justify we could prevent, with a fallacy known as hindsight bias.

 

One of the things about a Black Swan event that hasn't been touched on is the hindsight bias that gets applied to it. If you don't like Trump it's going to be easy to go back and say, "well, if we had those people he didn't lay off, Covid-19 wouldn't have happened/would have been lessened/etc."

It feels good emotionally to lash out at the leader, and the GOP idiots would be spit roasting a Dem if a Dem were President, but equally wouldn't make a significant difference.

It's like the M&M Prop 1 of capital structure but for politics; doesn't matter the leverage, it's all the same.

Edited by Rougarou
  • Fuck You 6
Posted
28 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Trump will never get credit from the TDS deranged lunatics on this board.  But the majority of Americans will consider it a huge win if the current model projection of 60,000 deaths comes to fruition.

No, they won't. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Rougarou said:

Black Swan events as we know them consist of the three components. I see the third component a lot on this board:

1) Impossible to predict

2) Wide-reaching and wide impact of consequences

3) People will try to justify we could prevent, with a fallacy known as hindsight bias.

 

One of the things about a Black Swan event that hasn't been touched on is the hindsight bias that gets applied to it. If you don't like Trump it's going to be easy to go back and say, "well, if we had those people he didn't lay off, Covid-19 wouldn't have happened/would have been lessened/etc."

The ability to prevent the absolute clusterfuck that has arisen here in the U.S. isn't just some hypothetical - other countries were absolutely able to get their shit together and minimize both the number of deaths and the impacts on their economies.  See South Korea.  Were they uniquely attuned to the risk given their history with SARS, etc?  Sure.  But there is absolutely no reason why it had to be this bad in the U.S., but for the imbecile in the White House and his persistent need to dismantle everything of value that Obama had put in place.  

Short version - STFU with this nonsense.

  • Like 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I laughed out loud at this part of that time article.

So the story that had gone viral simply wasn’t true: the teenager did not go to an urgent care clinic and he wasn’t uninsured. But one reason the story exploded on social media is that it felt emblematic of a broader, societal failing because it easily could have been true.

In which Time acts just like your Uncle Freddy after he is cold-busted posting fake news / quotes on Facebook. "Well, yeah, but it sounds like something he could have said."

Posted
40 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

f we get out of this with 60,000 deaths as is now modeled, that is a huge win for the country

 Don’t agree with much else in the post, but that part I agree. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

60,000 deaths is not a huge win for the country, no matter who or what spins it. That is garbage.

So how many people do you think are gonna die from this?   I think it’s over that number, well over.  If offered 60k right now I’d be hard press to say, nah, let’s take our chances. 
 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Pancho said:

How could anyone defend Trump right now? 

 

I was told our intelligence community was always incorrect regarding foreign interference.  Unless of course we can use them to blame other nations for the Covid-19 virus.

Posted
9 minutes ago, LonghornSean said:

 

Yeah, we MUST forget this. Like it never happened. Except if someone you know died

Lord have mercy. The phrasing. Someone take his phone and hide it again.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

So how many people do you think are gonna die from this?   I think it’s over that number, well over.  If offered 60k right now I’d be hard press to say, nah, let’s take our chances. 
 

 

Over what time span? We're almost certainly going to try to go back to normal too early and have a second breakout, and that's not even taking into consideration the potential for yet another breakout in the fall.

Posted
1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

So how many people do you think are gonna die from this?   I think it’s over that number, well over.  If offered 60k right now I’d be hard press to say, nah, let’s take our chances. 

I don't think we'll ever know. The official number is always going to be low because the response was botched and the administration dithered for two months.

Posted
8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I don't think we'll ever know. The official number is always going to be low because the response was botched and the administration dithered for two months.

It'll be pretty easy to look at the excess deaths that aren't included within the official count.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Black Swan events as we know them consist of the three components. I see the third component a lot on this board:

1) Impossible to predict

2) Wide-reaching and wide impact of consequences

3) People will try to justify we could prevent, with a fallacy known as hindsight bias.

 

One of the things about a Black Swan event that hasn't been touched on is the hindsight bias that gets applied to it. If you don't like Trump it's going to be easy to go back and say, "well, if we had those people he didn't lay off, Covid-19 wouldn't have happened/would have been lessened/etc."

While I appreciated the book, this was hardly not predictable.  There are people whose jobs it was to predict this and they did.   And the criticism is not about predicting the future past, but about how the administration lost critical time once it was known to be a serious hazard and how they actively took steps to spread misinformation and downplayed their response meanwhile members of congress were dumping their stocks to get ahead of the coming plunge.   Then we find out how weak our healthcare system is, and how it exists on the margins in spite of the wealth of this nation.    

Years before Katrina hit New Orleans it was brought to congress' attention that the levees were in need of repair/redesign and the cost was estimated to be $2 billion.  Congress balked at this figure.   Having done those modification the damage would have been far less severe.   

As a layperson in graduate school when the 2008 crash hit, I was mostly paying attention to my research.  I could see how health care costs were rising, and how housing costs were rising and yet wages remained stagnant.   I am a geoscientist, not an economist.  I could reason that if you have a set income, and you raise costs, that something has to give.  Since population wise, Americans do not save money and many live close to the margins, then this would collapse.   I knew a another fellow who came to the same conclusion.   My now half-Trumpkin parents advised me to buy a $300k house on a salary of $14K.  They were surprised by the collapse.  

 

  • Like 4
Posted
25 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

In which Time acts just like your Uncle Freddy after he is cold-busted posting fake news / quotes on Facebook. "Well, yeah, but it sounds like something he could have said."

Avatar checks out.

Posted
26 minutes ago, Pancho said:

How could anyone defend Trump right now? 

 

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper is claiming no recollection of memos and briefings. He's been having a rough week. First, the Secretary of Navy and now this. And IIRC (please correct me if I'm wrong), he's not completely unqualified to be in his position. But then again, this is the Trump administration.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/08/politics/us-intelligence-report-china-coronavirus/index.html

Posted
40 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Black Swan events as we know them consist of the three components. I see the third component a lot on this board:

1) Impossible to predict

2) Wide-reaching and wide impact of consequences

3) People will try to justify we could prevent, with a fallacy known as hindsight bias.

 

One of the things about a Black Swan event that hasn't been touched on is the hindsight bias that gets applied to it. If you don't like Trump it's going to be easy to go back and say, "well, if we had those people he didn't lay off, Covid-19 wouldn't have happened/would have been lessened/etc."

It feels good emotionally to lash out at the leader, and the GOP idiots would be spit roasting a Dem if a Dem were President, but equally wouldn't make a significant difference.

It's like the M&M Prop 1 of capital structure but for politics; doesn't matter the leverage, it's all the same.

If you're trying to say that competent leadership, who is focused on leading/helping the country rather than exclusively on themselves would not make a difference then I can't help you.  Nobody can.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Judge Roybeanbag said:

If you're trying to say that competent leadership, who is focused on leading/helping the country rather than exclusively on themselves would not make a difference then I can't help you.  Nobody can.

I'm saying the difference wouldn't be statistically significant, in a best case scenario that is modeled as of press time.

Posted

US intelligence officials were warning as far back as late November that the novel coronavirus was spreading through China's Wuhan region and posing a threat to its people and daily life, according to ABC News.

 

Somebody should publish the intelligence report. Coronavirus was not isolated and identified as the cause of illness until January.  The first reported cluster of infections were identified as an infectious pneumonia in late December. The first death reported on January 11.  Would be interesting to say what the report actually said about the leading signals that were being observed, and how they were interpreted.  I bet they have electronic communications between doctors and shit.   

Posted
4 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

I'm saying the difference wouldn't be statistically significant, in a best case scenario that is modeled as of press time.

The difference between the numbers here and in South Korea are pretty goddamned significant.

  • Like 2
Posted
43 minutes ago, LonghornSean said:

 

Yeah, we MUST forget this. Like it never happened. Except if someone you know died

HISTORY DOES NOT REPEAT ITSELF!   DON'T LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES!  FORGET IT EVER HAPPENED!  FOOL ME ONCE, FUHGEDDABOUTIT!

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

  But the majority of Americans will consider it a huge win if the current model projection of 60,000 deaths comes to fruition.

translation: 100% of Republicans are party over country hacks who will spin this as a victory for Trump despite the fact that he has been a complete and utter failure in all respects who has and will costs thousands of Americans their lives.

  • Like 3
Posted
40 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

60,000 deaths is not a huge win for the country, no matter who or what spins it. That is garbage.

I would say it would be at this stage. State gov't officials should get the credit though. Trump, and really the entire federal gov't, have done nothing but obfuscate and get in the way. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, elfenix said:

looks like texas is now behind such noted places as oklahoma and mississippi in testing.  good job, good effort.

(per 1point3acres)

According to worldometers - Texas is 49th in testing per one million population.

Posted
2 minutes ago, elfenix said:

looks like texas is now behind such noted places as oklahoma and mississippi in testing.  good job, good effort.

(per 1point3acres)

Among the lowest in the nation in deaths though, so we got that going for us. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

According to worldometers - Texas is 49th in testing per one million population.

may want to hit F5 on that

Posted
15 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

I'm saying the difference wouldn't be statistically significant, in a best case scenario that is modeled as of press time.

What are you basing this on?  Do you think the outcome of WWII would have been different if Chamberlain was to lead the Brits throughout the war as opposed to Churchill?

  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

entire world goes 'I am Legend' Aug 31 

Nah, that's gonna be after the vaccine.  It will prevent covid, but cause us to be mindless zombies that burn up in the sunlight, and it will also make apes and cats superintelligent.  So we will be huddled in the sewers scrounging for rats to eat while cats and apes fight a war for global supremacy on the surface.

  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...