CR: COVID-19 --Political Talk

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by Message Board User

[Tom 2,959]

1 hour ago, 4th&Five said:

I can’t believe he hasn’t twitter raged on this yet. 

 

 

"What we're fighting against is these long-term trends in which being selfish, being tribal, being divided, and seeing others as an enemy -- that has become a stronger impulse in American life."

______________________________________

 

"Wow.  Looks like Barack HUSSEIN Obama II hasn't given up trying to be the most divisive human being to ever live and hold office." - Tahoe/Swam

 

 

[Anastasis 23,484]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Hell, if we had a simple conversation that started with 1) our goal is to have as few people die as possible, so 2) let’s choose the path likely to have the fewest total deaths, and went from there...that would be amazing.

Agree, and it kinda get into aspects that have been touched on in the hypotheticals thread, which is a good exchange of perspectives, imo.  We have to have a broad view of the implications of covid, and the trade offs involved. Covid-related deaths can come from many sources, especially the longer that we implement intensive interventions to slow the spread. COVID-related mortality will comprise a wide range of deaths. Those directly related to the viral infection, those related to mental health issues and suicide, those related to poverty and food insecurity, those related to deferred medical management of other conditions, etc. And death is only one of the outcomes that need to be part of the assessment. The argument in that article is that economists are more well suited to bring a perspective that is very use to weighing trade offs, compared to epidemiologists whose training tends to lead them to a different focus and perspective. The discussion needs both, as well as perspectives on civil liberties. 

 

Anyways, just thought it was interesting food for thought. 

  

Edited May 9, 2020 by Anastasis

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,587]

36 minutes ago, Jive Turkey said:

Even if we somehow manage to get things under decent control, this is gonna happen here and we will need to do this all over again. 

 

Wanna get away?

[Brisketexan 105,319]

Agree, and it kinda get into aspects that have been touched on in the hypotheticals thread, which is a good exchange of perspectives, imo.  We have to have a broad view of the implications of covid, and the trade offs involved. Covid-related deaths can come from many sources, especially the longer that we implement intensive interventions to slow the spread. COVID-related mortality will comprise a wide range of deaths. Those directly related to the viral infection, those related to mental health issues and suicide, those related to poverty and food insecurity, those related to deferred medical management of other conditions, etc. And death is only one of the outcomes that need to be part of the assessment. The argument in that article is that economists are more well suited to bring a perspective that is very use to weighing trade offs, compared to epidemiologists whose training tends to lead them to a different focus and perspective. The discussion needs both, as well as perspectives on civil liberties. 
 
Anyways, just thought it was interesting food for thought. 
  

“Thought.” You’re adorable. Thought is for pussies. This is ‘Murica. We don’t cotton to “thought” round here. Just freedom and eagles and shit.

[Anastasis 23,484]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

“Thought.” You’re adorable. Thought is for pussies. This is ‘Murica. We don’t cotton to “thought” round here. Just freedom and eagles and shit.

Well, for better in most cases, this subforum is not particularly representative of America, so thought maybe we could handle it. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,898]

1 hour ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Torbush

 

 

How soon will we see a new crowd of "the depression never happened!" come through?

[Francisco 2.0 32,426]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pancho 44,986]

 

[jimmyjazz 46,124]

In case any of you want to hire Kevin Bain, here's a little info, although he might not be able to answer that phone:

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

I’d say Western Civilization had a good run but much of it was war and human suffering so maybe not all that great.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,534]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 

In a country capable of having a rational, adult conversation, that would be ideal.
Instead, it’s just a blind adversarial rage, with data (incomplete, often faulty data, with no reasonable alternate data) on one side, and PATRIOT EAGLE FREEDOM GUN! on the other.
Hell, if we had a simple conversation that started with 1) our goal is to have as few people die as possible, so 2) let’s choose the path likely to have the fewest total deaths, and went from there...that would be amazing. Have you heard that conversation anywhere? Not really. The only reason to have lockdowns is because libtard scientists hate Trump, so we need to get rid of lockdowns. And the answer to even asking people to wear masks is to say “FUCK YOU LIBERTY FLAG MURICA DIE, COMMIE!”
Rational thought is dead. Its rotten corpse stinks. Join me on the ledge.

 

PATRIOT EAGLE FREEDOM GUN made me chortle.  Thanks for that.

[TwiceHorn 31,534]

56 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

In case any of you want to hire Kevin Bain, here's a little info, although he might not be able to answer that phone:

Didn't see the preceding post, but Thompson Knight is the stuffiest of stuffy law firms.  Not surprised he was canned.

A lot of other firms would have, too.

[wildcat09 29,379]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Agree, and it kinda get into aspects that have been touched on in the hypotheticals thread, which is a good exchange of perspectives, imo.  We have to have a broad view of the implications of covid, and the trade offs involved. Covid-related deaths can come from many sources, especially the longer that we implement intensive interventions to slow the spread. COVID-related mortality will comprise a wide range of deaths. Those directly related to the viral infection, those related to mental health issues and suicide, those related to poverty and food insecurity, those related to deferred medical management of other conditions, etc. And death is only one of the outcomes that need to be part of the assessment. The argument in that article is that economists are more well suited to bring a perspective that is very use to weighing trade offs, compared to epidemiologists whose training tends to lead them to a different focus and perspective. The discussion needs both, as well as perspectives on civil liberties. 

 

Anyways, just thought it was interesting food for thought. 

  

In theory, involving economists because they’re trained to weigh trade offs differently sounds like a valid and reasonable opinion.  There are plenty of real economists out there who can do what you’re talking about.
 

Of course, that’s exactly why the GOP would absolutely never invite them to participate in such a discussion. In reality, involving economists in decision making means Art Laffer and Stephen Moore screaming that we have to reopen now to save the economy for der Fuhrer’s reelection. So until we get these lunatics out of power, we’re better off insisting that only medical experts should be listened to. Anything else, no matter how stupid, will be (and is currently being) immediately grasped at to excuse a path that won’t improve economic conditions but will kill tens to hundreds of thousands of more people.

[Aqua Buddha 14,608]

We’re such a soft country.

[Grandioso 2,592]

Posting this here instead of the Daily Texan Ahmaud Arbery thread.

This white privilege I keep hearing about might be a real thing. 

[Mapache 1,117]

 

[washparkhorn 9,939]

32 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

We’re such a soft country.

Pseudo-wealthy suburbanites - definitely. The rest of the nation - not so much. 

Poverty rates are spiking - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/upshot/coronavirus-prediction-rise-poverty.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

Spoiler

A Gloomy Prediction on How Much Poverty Could Rise

Researchers suggest the poverty rate may reach the highest levels in half a century, hitting African-Americans and children hardest.

By Jason DeParle

April 16, 2020

The pandemic crippling the American economy portends a sharp increase in poverty, to a level that could exceed that of the Great Recession and that may even reach a high for the half-century in which there is comparable data, according to researchers at Columbia University.

The coming wave of hardship is likely to widen racial disparities, with poverty projected to rise twice as much among blacks as among whites. Poverty is also likely to rise disproportionately among children, a special concern because brain science shows that early deprivation can leave lifelong scars. Children raised in poverty on average have worse adult health, lower earnings and higher incarceration rates.

If quarterly unemployment hits 30 percent — as the president of one Federal Reserve Bank predicts — 15.4 percent of Americans will fall into poverty for the year, the Columbia researchers found, even in the unlikely event the economy instantly recovers. That level of poverty would exceed the peak of the Great Recession and add nearly 10 million people to the ranks of the poor.

High unemployment is projected to increase the poverty rate and widen racial disparities.

Poverty rate under different unemployment scenarios (second quarter, April-June)

Feb. 2020 estimate

With jobs vanishing at a startling rate — 22 million in the last four weeks — there is great uncertainty about how high unemployment will go or how soon it will drop, but its potential to leave a wake of impoverishment has forecasters worried.

“While there’s a lot we still don’t know, these estimates give us a glimpse of the scope of the poverty problem we may be facing,” said Zachary Parolin of Columbia’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy, who produced the estimates along with Christopher Wimer.

There are significant caveats. Most important, the model does not yet include the potentially large anti-poverty effect of the Cares Act, the emergency legislation last month that provides about $560 billion in direct relief to individuals and even greater sums to sustain businesses and jobs. 

However imprecise, the model suggests a coming poverty epoch, rather than an episode. So far, economic forecasts have focused mostly on unemployment, which affects Americans at many income levels, rather than on poverty, a measure of acute distress.

“This exercise is useful, and the results are worrisome,” said Ron Haskins, a conservative poverty expert at the Brookings Institution who helped write the landmark 1990s law reducing access to welfare. “Even if we can’t look at the numbers precisely, they show us we’re going to have a big increase in poverty.”

The researchers use the Census Bureau’s fullest yardstick of poverty, the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which counts cash income, noncash benefits (like food stamps and subsidized housing), and the effect of taxes and refundable credits. It also adjusts for local costs of living.

A family of four renting a home in Phoenix, a city with typical living costs, is considered poor if its income is at or below $28,170 — the federal government’s estimate of what it takes to secure minimally adequate food, clothing and shelter.

Mr. Wimer has done pioneering work on poverty measurement. After the Census Bureau began using the Supplemental measure in 2011, he and his colleagues used government data to create analogous figures back to 1967.

In constructing their current model, he and Mr. Parolin, the lead researcher, used unemployment data to estimate the characteristics of those now losing their jobs, including their age, race, education and living arrangements. Then they used that demographic portrait to predict the idled workers’ chances of becoming poor, based on recent patterns.

Unlike unemployment numbers, which are released monthly, poverty rates are reported with a yearlong lag — too late to guide policymakers in a crisis. The Columbia team plans to begin publishing monthly estimates, possibly as soon as May. “We’re building a model that can be used in real time,” Mr. Wimer said.

Slow to register in government statistics, poor people are also generally the last to benefit from an economic recovery. It took 12 years from the start of the Great Recession for poverty rates to fall to their previous levels.

If the unemployment rate averaged 24 percent for a full year — a pessimistic but conceivable outcome — the share of Americans plunged into poverty would exceed that of any of the 53 years for which there are comparable measures.

If high unemployment persists, poverty levels could be the highest on record this year.

Unemployment scenarios are annual for 2020.

Feb. 2020 estimate

The Cares Act, which the model does not yet take into account, will spend $2 trillion to prop up the economy. It will send most Americans emergency checks ($1,200 per adult and $500 per child) and add $600 a week to unemployment benefits through July. While much of the money will go to people unlikely to fall into outright poverty, its impact on poverty rates is still expected to be substantial.

“It’s unlikely we’ll see poverty numbers as bad as these” in the Columbia model, said Scott Winship, who as executive director of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress works for Senator Mike Lee, a Utah Republican. “This a baseline for how bad things could get if policy didn’t respond. But it’s certainly the case that there will be a lot of hardship experienced — probably more, if I had to guess, than we saw in the Great Recession.”

The researchers will include the Cares Act in future simulations. Among the outstanding questions is whether or how promptly the aid will reach its intended beneficiaries, with many jobless people currently unable to file claims at overwhelmed government offices. “There are so many unknowns at the moment it would be hard to model precisely,” Mr. Parolin said.

Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research group that supports anti-poverty spending, said that the Cares Act would lower poverty in the short run, but that the Columbia model pointed to the long-term peril if the crisis endured. “We need to make sure the key provisions don’t expire as long as unemployment stays elevated,” he said.

The Columbia data does underscore the extent to which the safety net reduces poverty. At the start of the pandemic, the poverty rate would have been 25 percent without programs like food stamps and tax credits. That aid lifted 41 million people from poverty and halved the rate, to 12.4 percent.

The pandemic threatens a sharp reversal of fortune for the neediest Americans, who had benefited from the recent years of strong economic growth. Poverty among children, African-Americans and Latinos had fallen to record lows. Still, poverty — and child poverty in particular — remained higher in the United States than in most rich countries, which generally have stronger safety nets.

The phrase “poverty rate” is an anodyne term for a level of deprivation that predicts outcomes as various as stunted physical growth and educational underachievement, and that can turn life into a series of desperate choices, like feeding the children versus paying the rent. An annual unemployment rate of 20 percent would leave 55 million people poor, up from 40 million in February, the model predicts.

“Poverty represents a level of deprivation that many middle- or upper-income Americans can’t even wrap their head around,” said Sarah Halpern-Meekin, a sociologist at the University of Wisconsin who has conducted extensive interviews with poor parents. “The first thing that come to mind is a mother I met who was trying to manage her son’s asthma while living in an apartment that had rodents, insects and mold no matter how much she cleaned. Rising poverty rates means more families living like that.”

A rise in child poverty is especially worrisome, since even a brief spell can have lasting effects.

Poverty “disrupts the structure and function of the developing brain” through mechanisms that include poor nutrition, high stress and exposure to environmental toxins, said Dr. Deborah Frank, a professor at the Boston University School of Medicine. “Even mild deprivation at an early age can have ripples and ripples,” she said. “What we’re talking about here is not only what a mess we’re going to be in next year but the mess we’re going to be in in 20 years.”

Poverty measurement is contentious. Many liberals argue the Supplemental measure underestimates hardship, which persists well above the poverty line. Some conservatives say it exaggerates need because low-income Americans on average significantly underreport their income, as the Census Bureau acknowledges.

One group of critics say surveys of the goods and services that poor people consume provide a less worrisome and more accurate measure of unmet needs.

Among them is Bruce D. Meyer, an economist at the University of Chicago. He said that since the Columbia model left out all the benefits of the Cares Act, “I wouldn’t take the numbers seriously.” Still, he added, “You can expect that deprivation at the bottom is going to go up quite dramatically.”

 

[MrBig 5,439]

30 minutes ago, Grandioso said:

Posting this here instead of the Daily Texan Ahmaud Arbery thread.

This white privilege I keep hearing about might be a real thing. 

Im surprised Flowbee sales aren’t through the roof for certain demographics.

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Guest Lobo]

48 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

I can't remember the handle name because I just don't give a shit about pretend people but there's a poster on here that hates both my disdain for Trump and my distain for Subway sandwich shops.  I doubt he comes on CR, but I'd really like to connect with him on this topic.  

It's amazing how people choose to make a stand.  Chili's, Subway, Guns 'N Ammo...it's not about price points.  It's not about pride points.  It's about being a fucking idiot.  

Backing the wrong candidate is like backing the wrong sandwich.  Of course you regret it and want to shit it out, but you can't let people know you're filled with remorse and yoga mat bread.  

Edited May 9, 2020 by Lobo

[Born to Run 6,569]

I can't remember the handle name because I just don't give a shit about pretend people but there's a poster on here that hates both my disdain for Trump and my distain for Subway sandwich shops.  I doubt he comes on CR, but I'd really like to connect with him on this topic.  
It's amazing how people choose to make a stand.  Chili's, Subway, Guns 'N Ammo...it's not about price points.  It's not about pride points.  It's about being a fucking idiot.  
Backing the wrong candidate is like backing the wrong sandwich.  Of course you regret it and want to shit it out, but you can't let people know you're filled with remorse and yoga mat bread.  

Hating Subway and Trump?

I am Spartacus!

[conVINCEd 21,469]

There’s actually a person who likes Subway?  I mean, I’ve reluctantly eaten it as a meal of convenience, but I have a difficult time believing someone would enthusiastically choose it.

[Brisketexan 105,319]

There’s actually a person who likes Subway?  I mean, I’ve reluctantly eaten it as a meal of convenience, but I have a difficult time believing someone would enthusiastically choose it.

My 17 yr old boy digs the turkey and the meatball. Remember being that age, and “cheap and filling” were the priority? Yeah.

[4th&Five 41,586]

There are some great restaurants in downtown Raleigh but of course these morons go to subway. 
 

 

[4th&Five 41,586]

 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,486]

On 5/8/2020 at 3:11 PM, 4th&Five said:

 

 

 

 

[RomaVicta 30,012]

 

You know, you feed the chickens everyday and it's fine. Beautiful chickens. Easy. Then, suddenly, it's a problem. Fortunately, I'm the best chicken feeder in the world.

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Michael Knight 12,994]

Fauci is going into quarantine

[Message Board User 12,396]

2 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Fauci is going into quarantine

He kind of already was.

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Radical Larry 28,662]

8 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

 

If the COVID doesn't kill you, they have the best electric chair ever!

[Message Board User 12,396]

 

[Guest Lobo]

that's pretty generic neurological content that would help a lot of people, myself included, see what this thing looks like.  

It should be posted on DT, but several folks would have a shit-fit around it with no sense of irony.

I love that a website dedicated to one of the best public universities in the world protects ignorant bullshit above everything else!  Hook 'Em!!!!!!!!!

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,523]

Seems like the White House may have a higher positive rate than most states.   But most there are still not allowed to wear masks. 

[conVINCEd 21,469]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

My 17 yr old boy digs the turkey and the meatball. Remember being that age, and “cheap and filling” were the priority? Yeah.

I probably ate my weight in Subway meatball subs in college.  If I amended my post to say a person over the age of 25 would you agree?

[yoladu 4,094]

8 hours ago, Jive Turkey said:

Even if we somehow manage to get things under decent control, this is gonna happen here and we will need to do this all over again. 

 

13 new cases prompted a 30 day shut down?

Here in the US, we wouldn’t even bother to notice  

It’s apparent that life is much cheaper here than in S. Korea. 

Edited May 10, 2020 by yoladu

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[4th&Five 41,586]

20 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

 

Nah, it’s the flu. Rush out and get it!

Also, I’m very intrigued to see the red county vs. blue county stats when this is all done. 

Edited May 10, 2020 by 4th&Five

[HenryJames 66,169]

 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Seems like the White House may have a higher positive rate than most states.   But most there are still not allowed to wear masks. 

[Horn Dog 9,915]

Edited May 10, 2020 by Horn Dog

[Nivek 16,983]

 

Still would. I’ll hate myself, but kind of not.

[Message Board User 12,396]