Rapier108 said:

---

Well, my mom told me earlier today that her cousin and his wife canceled their Mediterranean tour and they've been told no refund so they're out $5,000. They decided the morning they were supposed to fly out that losing $5,000 was worth not taking the risk. Little did they know the main part of their trip, visiting Israel, wouldn't have happened anyway.

---

If I remember right they were flying from city to city? They should at the very minimum be able to get their taxes for the flights refunded.

MetoliusAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We get it. The desired effect is to keep a segment of society alive longer to eventually die of the same disease anyways. By delaying the inevitable we'll hopefully save lives of the other unhealthy people that also need medical care. The reason the government and media aren't relaying the message is that it sucks and sounds like a form of rationing.

---

No. The desired effect is to reduce the spread, to reduce the peak. This saves more lives in the long run by affording better care to those who are inevitably going to get it and who are at higher risk.

It also prevents the rationing that will a matter of fact if the number of cases exceeds capacity.

---

Reducing the spread and the peak is fine but if we have a long-flat peak (upside down U) versus a short high-peak (upside down V), is that really worth it in the long run? Especially if estimates are that 60-70% of the population is going to get it anyways? Should we suffer now greatly now and get is over with or suffer less but more slowly over time? Again I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.

And by rationing I would also consider it to include time, money and general happiness. From the outside, the young and healthy appear to be taking the brunt of the effort, lifestyle change and monetary loss.

---

I'm a retiree, and 95% of my best friends, siblings, cousins, in-laws, and favorite hunting & fishing buddies are in the age range of 60 to 90 (including many Trumper friends who I love dearly). So I too am glad you are not the one making these decisions.

---

You're selfishness is noted and, imo, commendable. I'm simply trying to ask questions and be open and honest about my desire to protect my family, friends and community. You do you and I'll do me.

tysker said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We get it. The desired effect is to keep a segment of society alive longer to eventually die of the same disease anyways. By delaying the inevitable we'll hopefully save lives of the other unhealthy people that also need medical care. The reason the government and media aren't relaying the message is that it sucks and sounds like a form of rationing.

---

No. The desired effect is to reduce the spread, to reduce the peak. This saves more lives in the long run by affording better care to those who are inevitably going to get it and who are at higher risk.

It also prevents the rationing that will a matter of fact if the number of cases exceeds capacity.

---

Reducing the spread and the peak is fine but if we have a long-flat peak (upside down U) versus a short high-peak (upside down V), is that really worth it in the long run? Especially if estimates are that 60-70% of the population is going to get it anyways? Should we suffer now greatly now and get is over with or suffer less but more slowly over time? Again I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.

And by rationing I would also consider it to include time, money and general happiness. From the outside, the young and healthy appear to be taking the brunt of the effort, lifestyle change and monetary loss.

---

I'm a retiree, and 95% of my best friends, siblings, cousins, in-laws, and favorite hunting & fishing buddies are in the age range of 60 to 90 (including many Trumper friends who I love dearly). So I too am glad you are not the one making these decisions.

---

You're selfishness is noted and, imo, commendable. I'm simply trying to ask questions and be open and honest about my desire to protect my family, friends and community. You do you and I'll do me.

---

So deaths of people in their 60-90s would be considered OK if it meant the younger generation didn't take a lifestyle hit?

I mean, don't get me wrong... Things would suck if we go into a big depression... But you'd still be alive.

what is scarier this or the imminent threat of nuclear war?
look at this situation that way and you'll find comfort and relief.

KorbinDallas said:

---

---

Those Italy numbers are going to be most of the West shortly. This thing is an old person killer in a way I've never seen before. It's like someone from Logan's Run designed this thing.

Norway is one I've started watching. Their numbers have started picking up steam.
+202 today, 602 total.

No deaths though.

EDIT: Here's a map if anyone cares at all. https://www.vg.no/spesial/2020/corona-viruset/?utm_source=vgfront&utm_content=row-1

Most of their cases related to travel, but now they're seeing cases they can't trace back. Their starting to ban cruise ships from port in places like Bergen and Stavanger.

Local hospital here in Dallas has put up a tent outside the ER in the parking lot to triage anyone who think they might have it. From other friends in medical / ER, that should be part of every hospital's plan for this.

Washington state has already reorged Seattle area hospitals to have dedicated corona hospitals and routing everyone else to the others. I expect more of that moving forward.

My PCP here in Dallas sent us a note saying if we have symptoms to come to their building but call from the parking lot and they will come out and check us out there.

CDub06 said:

---

Norway is one I've started watching. Their numbers have started picking up steam.
+202 today, 602 total.

No deaths though.

---

Qatar. 24 total yesterday but they added 238 today.

Denmark +180 today for a 442 total

Bahrain 85 added today for a 195 total

Sweden +145 today, 500 total

Switzerland +155, 652 total

Seems the whole of Scandinavia is about to get hit hard.

Proposition Joe said:

---

tysker said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We get it. The desired effect is to keep a segment of society alive longer to eventually die of the same disease anyways. By delaying the inevitable we'll hopefully save lives of the other unhealthy people that also need medical care. The reason the government and media aren't relaying the message is that it sucks and sounds like a form of rationing.

---

No. The desired effect is to reduce the spread, to reduce the peak. This saves more lives in the long run by affording better care to those who are inevitably going to get it and who are at higher risk.

It also prevents the rationing that will a matter of fact if the number of cases exceeds capacity.

---

Reducing the spread and the peak is fine but if we have a long-flat peak (upside down U) versus a short high-peak (upside down V), is that really worth it in the long run? Especially if estimates are that 60-70% of the population is going to get it anyways? Should we suffer now greatly now and get is over with or suffer less but more slowly over time? Again I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.

And by rationing I would also consider it to include time, money and general happiness. From the outside, the young and healthy appear to be taking the brunt of the effort, lifestyle change and monetary loss.

---

I'm a retiree, and 95% of my best friends, siblings, cousins, in-laws, and favorite hunting & fishing buddies are in the age range of 60 to 90 (including many Trumper friends who I love dearly). So I too am glad you are not the one making these decisions.

---

You're selfishness is noted and, imo, commendable. I'm simply trying to ask questions and be open and honest about my desire to protect my family, friends and community. You do you and I'll do me.

---

So deaths of people in their 60-90s would be considered OK if it meant the younger generation didn't take a lifestyle hit?

I mean, don't get me wrong... Things would suck if we go into a big depression... But you'd still be alive.

---

You have to look at the big picture here and balance the direct health impact of the virus against the impact of actions taken to contain the virus.

And that absolutely includes the economic impact.

People hate the flu comparison but it is a seasonal killer and we don't shut down the entire country every winter despite the fact that it kills thousands of people every year and if we did shut things down during flu season we could prevent a whole lot of deaths. Why is that? Because we have balanced the risk/reward of doing that and have decided that the greater death toll is worth not causing major disruptions to our society.

The key then is finding the right balance between mitigating the impact and disrupting our society.

Proposition Joe said:

---

tysker said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We get it. The desired effect is to keep a segment of society alive longer to eventually die of the same disease anyways. By delaying the inevitable we'll hopefully save lives of the other unhealthy people that also need medical care. The reason the government and media aren't relaying the message is that it sucks and sounds like a form of rationing.

---

No. The desired effect is to reduce the spread, to reduce the peak. This saves more lives in the long run by affording better care to those who are inevitably going to get it and who are at higher risk.

It also prevents the rationing that will a matter of fact if the number of cases exceeds capacity.

---

Reducing the spread and the peak is fine but if we have a long-flat peak (upside down U) versus a short high-peak (upside down V), is that really worth it in the long run? Especially if estimates are that 60-70% of the population is going to get it anyways? Should we suffer now greatly now and get is over with or suffer less but more slowly over time? Again I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.

And by rationing I would also consider it to include time, money and general happiness. From the outside, the young and healthy appear to be taking the brunt of the effort, lifestyle change and monetary loss.

---

I'm a retiree, and 95% of my best friends, siblings, cousins, in-laws, and favorite hunting & fishing buddies are in the age range of 60 to 90 (including many Trumper friends who I love dearly). So I too am glad you are not the one making these decisions.

---

You're selfishness is noted and, imo, commendable. I'm simply trying to ask questions and be open and honest about my desire to protect my family, friends and community. You do you and I'll do me.

---

So deaths of people in their 60-90s would be considered OK if it meant the younger generation didn't take a lifestyle hit?

I mean, don't get me wrong... Things would suck if we go into a big depression... But you'd still be alive.

---

That's not what I'm saying at all. For example if 100,000 people are going to die from this anyways, is a prolonged recession caused by lengthening the infection time-frame (flattening the curve so as to keep the health care facilities functional) to ultimately save 10,000 lives worth it? Its basically a different version of the trolley problem.

Businesses, conferences, schools etc arent being stopped because of true fear of outbreak but instead for possible liability reasons. But what's the end-game and when is will it be "safe" to go back?

It may be cold to admit, but at this point there's no end to the spread and deaths will continue mount. Now its just managing the hospital beds until a vaccine is available or we develop a natural immunity. Saving the marginal person's life seems to be ultimate point of cancellations, isolation tactics and quarantines, not actually saving people from CoronaVirus.

its too late. the dissemination of the picture of this thing under the microscope has the population spooked.
once spooked its over

KorbinDallas said:

---

I don't know that I have seen any education efforts coming out of the government. I'm sure the CDC and other local health authorities have info on their webpages, but that's dependent on people going to them.

---

At the presser several days ago, Pence repeatedly referenced the corona website they have set up for the public and pleaded with the media to get the word out.

I don't think the presser was even linked or referenced in this thread.

Them Vegas boys will not like this

bearkatag15 said:

---

---

Great now, the NCAA is in on the liberal media conspiracy.

bearkatag15 said:

---

---

That would suck. It's probably the best sporting event in the country. Especially opening weekend.

AG 2000' said:

---

Local hospital here in Dallas has put up a tent outside the ER in the parking lot to triage anyone who think they might have it. From other friends in medical / ER, that should be part of every hospital's plan for this.

---

T&Ps for that temp tent undergoing spring storm season here in Texas.

PJYoung said:

---

CDub06 said:

---

Norway is one I've started watching. Their numbers have started picking up steam.
+202 today, 602 total.

No deaths though.

---

Qatar. 24 total yesterday but they added 238 today.

Denmark +180 today for a 442 total

Bahrain 85 added today for a 195 total

Sweden +145 today, 500 total

Switzerland +155, 652 total

---

I am almost with you but not quite. Watching this thing develop as a slow burn is excruciating and I think it just adds to everyone's anxiety.

I don't want to see the world burn but I wish we could get on with this and just get it over with.

IrishTxAggie said:

---

---

Guessing we have finally hit a tipping point, and this will be a serious statement on the matter.

Quote:

---

Now its just managing the hospital beds until a vaccine is available or we develop a natural immunity.

---

or you get better therapeutics to help free up beds faster. more supply, better protocols.

bearkatag15 said:

---

---

The Lost Champion. ESPN 30 for 30 is ready.

today feels like a major major escalation

they must be seeing an iceberg somewhere

I Have Spoken said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

---

Guessing we have finally hit a tipping point, and this will be a serious statement on the matter.

---

Think it will be about the stimulus bill

cone said:

---

today feels like a major major escalation

they must be seeing an iceberg somewhere

---

Or Trump wants to lay out relief package plans ...

cone said:

---

today feels like a major major escalation

they must be seeing an iceberg somewhere

---

So are all of your posts doom and gloom? Just curious ...

ntxVOL said:

---

I am almost with you but not quite. Watching this thing develop as a slow burn is excruciating and I think it just adds to everyone's anxiety.

I don't want to see the world burn but I wish we could get on with this and just get it over with.

---

The anxiety is bad and knowing you'll probably get it but you dont know when is the worst part. And the possibility of infecting my family and friends. Being patient zero for my tribe would be emotionally devastating if someone become really ill or died.

I Have Spoken said:

---

IrishTxAggie said:

---

---

Guessing we have finally hit a tipping point, and this will be a serious statement on the matter.

---

Great, now Trump is on the liberal media conspiracy to prevent his own election. Someone should tell him this Is just the flu.

tysker said:

---

MetoliusAg said:

---

tysker said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We get it. The desired effect is to keep a segment of society alive longer to eventually die of the same disease anyways. By delaying the inevitable we'll hopefully save lives of the other unhealthy people that also need medical care. The reason the government and media aren't relaying the message is that it sucks and sounds like a form of rationing.

---

No. The desired effect is to reduce the spread, to reduce the peak. This saves more lives in the long run by affording better care to those who are inevitably going to get it and who are at higher risk.

It also prevents the rationing that will a matter of fact if the number of cases exceeds capacity.

---

Reducing the spread and the peak is fine but if we have a long-flat peak (upside down U) versus a short high-peak (upside down V), is that really worth it in the long run? Especially if estimates are that 60-70% of the population is going to get it anyways? Should we suffer now greatly now and get is over with or suffer less but more slowly over time? Again I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions.

And by rationing I would also consider it to include time, money and general happiness. From the outside, the young and healthy appear to be taking the brunt of the effort, lifestyle change and monetary loss.

---

I'm a retiree, and 95% of my best friends, siblings, cousins, in-laws, and favorite hunting & fishing buddies are in the age range of 60 to 90 (including many Trumper friends who I love dearly). So I too am glad you are not the one making these decisions.

---

You're selfishness is noted and, imo, commendable. I'm simply trying to ask questions and be open and honest about my desire to protect my family, friends and community. You do you and I'll do me.

---

No offense taken, friend. I was just making a personal observation from my own point of view.

In truth, I've enjoyed reading the questions you've been asking, the rationales you've posited, and the ongoing discussion your posts have instigated, even though I am fully aware of the results those rationales would cause if our federal, state, county, and city govmts took them.

I'll add that I think your focus on how you are impacted personally substantially underweights the financial, cultural, and societal impact (and political power) of the 100M Americans age 60 and above who vote, travel, spend money, own businesses and assets, buy lots of stuff, eat out, and make up a huge and invaluable part of the American culture, economy, and society Plus there's a lot of trans-generational knowledge and wisdom we "olds" were handed down from preceding generations which we still haven't finished passing down to younger generations yet.

i'm saying in terms of cancellations, including school systems and sporting leagues

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

---

Damn