Crompton's predictions about TAMU

23,715 Views | 137 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Cholula Verde
Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieBarstool said:

Online classes is the right way to go for Fall 2020. Reassess Spring term closer to the end of the year.

Any / all sports should be cancelled or postponed. Risking your health to watch football? Yeah, that's dumb. Jobs and profit losses be damned.
The more jobs and profits lost...which in turn impact more jobs...and supply chains...and the ability for people to provide basic needs...the more risk to people's health.

Simply shutting down until 2021 isn't going to provide "less risk" to people's health. Keeping things shut down that long isn't a rational solution.
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieBarstool said:

Online classes is the right way to go for Fall 2020. Reassess Spring term closer to the end of the year.

Any / all sports should be cancelled or postponed. Risking your health to watch football? Yeah, that's dumb. Jobs and profit losses be damned.
Curious ... where would you set the bar for re-opening A&M?

BlueMiles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Isn't Crompton an international tourism consultant?
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gigem314 said:

AggieBarstool said:

Online classes is the right way to go for Fall 2020. Reassess Spring term closer to the end of the year.

Any / all sports should be cancelled or postponed. Risking your health to watch football? Yeah, that's dumb. Jobs and profit losses be damned.
The more jobs and profits lost...which in turn impact more jobs...and supply chains...and the ability for people to provide basic needs...the more risk to people's health.

Simply shutting down until 2021 isn't going to provide "less risk" to people's health. Keeping things shut down that long isn't a rational solution.
I am curious, and this is not meant as an antagonistic question:

If you were allowed to go out, no restrictions on your activities at all, would you be willing to sign a contract stating that in the event you caught Covid-19 you would have no right to emergency room service? I'm curious to know how comfortable you feel with that gamble.

Do you think enough people would sign this contract to get the economy going again?
australopithecus robustus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Would you be willing to sign a contract that if you got in a car wreck, got struck by lightning, got the flu etc. that you would forego ER service?
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How about you stay home and worry until there's zero chance of anyone dying/getting sick from anything ever again and let other folks get back to work?
91_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The point of the quarantine is to lower the curve so hospitals are not overwhelmed.

It is NOT to stay at home until the very last person who currently has COVID recovers from it and then we are safe again.

The virus is going to be around forever like the virus that causes the Common Flu and colds.

Some of you have gone overboard on the "We must stay at home" directive they keep seeing on Facebook, Instagram, Hollywood actors, musicians, etc. but are not really researching on your own WHY we are currently doing this.

People are gonna die, either from this or from something else. The world has gone nuts with the "No one should ever die from something that seems like it should be preventable". People die every day.
We want to prevent the hospitals from being overwhelmed, but we can't stay quarantined until they find a vaccine or cure (that could take years).

So, those with the stance "We can never go back to work until there is 100% chance no one else will die" are wrong. That's an extreme position.
And those with the "Well we should be able to do whatever we want RIGHT NOW" are also wrong... that's an extreme position.

The answer lies in a common sense middle somewhere.

Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

I am curious, and this is not meant as an antagonistic question:

If you were allowed to go out, no restrictions on your activities at all, would you be willing to sign a contract stating that in the event you caught Covid-19 you would have no right to emergency room service? I'm curious to know how comfortable you feel with that gamble.

Do you think enough people would sign this contract to get the economy going again?
Which means it probably is.

Personally, if I got COVID, I wouldn't be going straight to the ER as a walk-in. I would go through my personal provider at the sign of any symptoms and then calmly see what I needed from there.

To answer the question, I would sign...right after everyone demanding businesses remain closed signed over their paychecks and homes.
woodiewood1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lost my dog said:

Gigem314 said:

AggieBarstool said:

Online classes is the right way to go for Fall 2020. Reassess Spring term closer to the end of the year.

Any / all sports should be cancelled or postponed. Risking your health to watch football? Yeah, that's dumb. Jobs and profit losses be damned.
The more jobs and profits lost...which in turn impact more jobs...and supply chains...and the ability for people to provide basic needs...the more risk to people's health.

Simply shutting down until 2021 isn't going to provide "less risk" to people's health. Keeping things shut down that long isn't a rational solution.
I am curious, and this is not meant as an antagonistic question:

If you were allowed to go out, no restrictions on your activities at all, would you be willing to sign a contract stating that in the event you caught Covid-19 you would have no right to emergency room service? I'm curious to know how comfortable you feel with that gamble.

Do you think enough people would sign this contract to get the economy going again?
Some 65,000 persons die on the highway every year. Should we sign the same contract in order to drive? How about everyone that smoke, overweight, or have a poor diet sign the same contract?
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There was a doctor on Fox News who took it a step further and said he wouldn't feel comfortable going back to normal if it made a single person get sick. Not die. Sick. Folks have lost common sense like you said.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gigem314 said:


Quote:

I am curious, and this is not meant as an antagonistic question:

If you were allowed to go out, no restrictions on your activities at all, would you be willing to sign a contract stating that in the event you caught Covid-19 you would have no right to emergency room service? I'm curious to know how comfortable you feel with that gamble.

Do you think enough people would sign this contract to get the economy going again?
Which means it probably is.

Personally, if I got COVID, I wouldn't be going straight to the ER as a walk-in. I would go through my personal provider at the sign of any symptoms and then calmly see what I needed from there.

To answer the question, I would sign...right after everyone demanding businesses remain closed signed over their paychecks and homes.
No, it really wasn't meant in an antagonistic manner. I'm sorry that it came across that way. I was genuinely curious how committed to your position you are, but in retrospect it's not really a good question.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
woodiewood1 said:




Some 65,000 persons die on the highway every year. Should we sign the same contract in order to drive? How about everyone that smoke, overweight, or have a poor diet sign the same contract?
We don't simply accept the risk of driving. We make efforts to make it safer and pay real money to do so. I'm old enough to remember cars without seat belts. Now every car has seat belts, and even airbags. ABS brakes are another safety system new cars have that old ones don't - it cost time and money to develop them, and they add to the price of the car. My point is everyone is already paying for improvements in road safety - you are paying to reduce the number of road deaths.

If you smoke, you are paying more for life insurance and medical insurance. States have raised taxes on tobacco, in part to discourage you from smoking. Again, you are free to do this, but you are paying somewhat for your societal impact. And we don't allow smoking anymore (e.g. restaurants) in places were other people who have not chosen to smoke would be impacted.

Look, I'm tired of being at home too, and I should have remembered that the internet is not a place to have a rational discussion, but I was curious about people's risk/reward trade-off in the case of Covid-19. Staying home forever is not what I'm advocating at all. Going out during a pandemic when you could become a disease vector does have a potential societal impact, and I was trying to see what people thought about who should pay for that impact.

And yes, people being forced to stay at home does have an impact on your business, and the government recognized that fact and started the PPP for small businesses. My point is not whether that is a good or bad program, but that society recognized that forcing people to stay home had an impact and attempted to pay for it.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

woodiewood1 said:




Some 65,000 persons die on the highway every year. Should we sign the same contract in order to drive? How about everyone that smoke, overweight, or have a poor diet sign the same contract?
We don't simply accept the risk of driving. We make efforts to make it safer and pay real money to do so. I'm old enough to remember cars without seat belts. Now every car has seat belts, and even airbags. ABS brakes are another safety system new cars have that old ones don't - it cost time and money to develop them, and they add to the price of the car. My point is everyone is already paying for improvements in road safety - you are paying to reduce the number of road deaths.

If you smoke, you are paying more for life insurance and medical insurance. States have raised taxes on tobacco, in part to discourage you from smoking. Again, you are free to do this, but you are paying somewhat for your societal impact. And we don't allow smoking anymore (e.g. restaurants) in places were other people who have not chosen to smoke would be impacted.

Look, I'm tired of being at home too, and I should have remembered that the internet is not a place to have a rational discussion, but I was curious about people's risk/reward trade-off in the case of Covid-19. Staying home forever is not what I'm advocating at all. Going out during a pandemic when you could become a disease vector does have a potential societal impact, and I was trying to see what people thought about who should pay for that impact.

And yes, people being forced to stay at home does have an impact on your business, and the government recognized that fact and started the PPP for small businesses. My point is not whether that is a good or bad program, but that society recognized that forcing people to stay home had an impact and attempted to pay for it.
This. This is the issue; way more than the economics.


Quote:

If your at risk, strongly consider staying home.

If you are concerned about bringing it to someone who is, you might stay home or take appropriate measures if you must go out.

If you are "scared," purely for lack of a better term, stay home.

If you are none of these, you should not be FORCED to stay home.


I've seen people chastising those who want to re-open as "selfish." I would submit that it is those that want their fears to govern/restrict the actions who are the selfish parties.

This is akin to your (not YOUR, specifically) hoplophobia driving my actions with respect to gun ownership. It's irrational. We wouldn't stand for it on nearly any issue, but we're expected to line up and comply in this case?
Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

No, it really wasn't meant in an antagonistic manner. I'm sorry that it came across that way. I was genuinely curious how committed to your position you are, but in retrospect it's not really a good question.
Well at least we can agree on something...
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I happened upon this quotation from Mirabeau Lamar.

This is the first I've seen it, but it is fitting in this discussion for two reasons.

First, today is the 184th Anniversary of the Battle of San Jacinto in which Lamar lead the Texian cavalry, and also Aggie Muster.

Second, Lamar was key in the prioritization of higher education and led efforts that culminated in the establishment of TX A&M, and that other school in Austin, and since we are discussing reopening TX A&M in fall 2020, his words are, to a degree, appropriate.


Quote:

"The cultivated mind is the guardian genius of democracy and, while guided and controlled by virtue, the noblest attribute of man. It is the only dictator that freemen acknowledge and the only security that freemen desire"

benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

Do you think enough people would sign this contract to get the economy going again?
I'd sign .... provided our local government provided detailed daily infection source information:

1. Location of each community spread infection case and source ... for example, zip code + 2 ... or within the 24 ISD elementary school zones in Bryan-College Station.

2. Source of every community spread infection identified by probable originating infection source
  • Place of employment (by industry)
  • Residence (by type)
  • Retail (by type)
  • Public areas (by description)
  • Health Care Facility (by category)
  • Immediate Family Member or other.
  • Public Event or large gathering (by type)
  • Unknown
nthomas99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lost my dog said:

woodiewood1 said:




Some 65,000 persons die on the highway every year. Should we sign the same contract in order to drive? How about everyone that smoke, overweight, or have a poor diet sign the same contract?
We don't simply accept the risk of driving. We make efforts to make it safer and pay real money to do so. I'm old enough to remember cars without seat belts. Now every car has seat belts, and even airbags. ABS brakes are another safety system new cars have that old ones don't - it cost time and money to develop them, and they add to the price of the car. My point is everyone is already paying for improvements in road safety - you are paying to reduce the number of road deaths.

If you smoke, you are paying more for life insurance and medical insurance. States have raised taxes on tobacco, in part to discourage you from smoking. Again, you are free to do this, but you are paying somewhat for your societal impact. And we don't allow smoking anymore (e.g. restaurants) in places were other people who have not chosen to smoke would be impacted.

Look, I'm tired of being at home too, and I should have remembered that the internet is not a place to have a rational discussion, but I was curious about people's risk/reward trade-off in the case of Covid-19. Staying home forever is not what I'm advocating at all. Going out during a pandemic when you could become a disease vector does have a potential societal impact, and I was trying to see what people thought about who should pay for that impact.

And yes, people being forced to stay at home does have an impact on your business, and the government recognized that fact and started the PPP for small businesses. My point is not whether that is a good or bad program, but that society recognized that forcing people to stay home had an impact and attempted to pay for it.

The counter arguments to driving and smoke are valid. What's missing in applying those cases to covid is modeling and free market forces. In the first case, sure government regulation stepped it, but it was based on tons of data available to all. In the second case, you're talking about private companies with competition, basing economic decisions on incredibly sophisticated modeling. And I'm not disallowed medical care, I just have to pay a risk adjusted premium for it.

In this case, data is being withheld. With publicly available data, we are more than in a position in the county to start rolling back restrictions, in a measured manner. Doing so and measuring impact sooner sets the ball in motion to have timely, accurate data to make more informed decisions about what impact students have the the equation before go/no go deadlines hit on how to handle the coming semesters.

Setting privacy and personal liberty concerns aside for the thought exercise, I'll answer a variant of your question. If data and models were open sourced and subject to public scrutiny and independent validation... Furthermore, if said models predicted that a certain degree of roll-back of social distancing would with reasonably high probability overwhelm the medical complex... would I be willing to pay a commensurate higher cost (i.e., insurance) to break these rules (just as with smoking)? Absolutely. Then it's my decision to weigh the economic costs accordingly, and there would be plenty of disincentive to discourage unnecessary risk by people.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

..." Future school closures anywhere from pre-K to post-doc, for a disease that almost entirely spares students, should not even be a consideration now in a society which places any value on children and their education. Which means sports, including the college football bell cow will be back. Some suggest that we may not kick-off until the spring, but unless there is a rush to judgment in the next two months, I don't think that will be necessary."
http://www.collegestationbeagle.com/index.html


taxpreparer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

And yes, people being forced to stay at home does have an impact on your business, and the government recognized that fact and started the PPP for small businesses. My point is not whether that is a good or bad program, but that society recognized that forcing people to stay home had an impact and attempted to pay for it.


And who actually pays this? We all do through increased taxes. That is just federal.

Local sales taxes and hotel taxes are plummeting which means local governments are going to bit increase tax rates, be forced to cut services.

State sales taxes and oil taxes are also plummeting; how will it make up the difference; or, what i will it cut?

Government only has money it acquires from the citizens through taxes or user fees.
***It's your money, not theIRS! (At least for a little while longer.)
isitjustme
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
saltydog13 said:

How about you stay home and worry until there's zero chance of anyone dying/getting sick from anything ever again and let other folks get back to work?
Not a good idea either as tens of 1,000s die at home each year due to accidental causes led by poisoning, falls, suffocation, drowning, and fires. So we shouldn't stay at home and hope to be safe either.
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Touche
isitjustme
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
saltydog13 said:

Touch
Sounds potentially naughty, but it could be an accidental cause of in-home death.
AggieBarstool
How long do you want to ignore this user?
benchmark said:

AggieBarstool said:

Online classes is the right way to go for Fall 2020. Reassess Spring term closer to the end of the year.

Any / all sports should be cancelled or postponed. Risking your health to watch football? Yeah, that's dumb. Jobs and profit losses be damned.
Curious ... where would you set the bar for re-opening A&M?


I don't have the background to exactly qualify or quantify that, but it would involve --
  • a significant boost in the number of available antigen/antibody tests and lifting restrictions on who can get tested (so health experts know exactly where the hotspots are and focus contact tracing efforts), AND
  • to a lesser extent, an FDA-approved vaccine.

I could see resuming most non-essential services, where business can be conducted at a distance or with limited interaction, in the near-term, with other activities that require large gatherings not resume until a vaccine is developed and mass-distributed.
histag10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That sounds like living in a whole lot of fear and government overreach....
Rapier108
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I could see resuming most non-essential services, where business can be conducted at a distance or with limited interaction, in the near-term, with other activities that require large gatherings not resume until a vaccine is developed and mass-distributed.
And if one is never developed, of which there is a good chance it won't be due to the nature of coronaviruses, you would keep the country locked down to a great degree forever?

Jeez dude, if the country does what you suggest, there will be no country left in a year.
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Sir Winston Churchill
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agrab86 said:

saltydog13 said:

Touch
Sounds potentially naughty, but it could be an accidental cause of in-home death.

I wish I had the laughing/crying emoji. Damn autocorrect. It was supposed to be touche
benchmark
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieBarstool said:

I don't have the background to exactly qualify or quantify that, but it would involve --

  • a significant boost in the number of available antigen/antibody tests and lifting restrictions on who can get tested (so health experts know exactly where the hotspots are and focus contact tracing efforts), AND
  • to a lesser extent, an FDA-approved vaccine.

I could see resuming most non-essential services, where business can be conducted at a distance or with limited interaction, in the near-term, with other activities that require large gatherings not resume until a vaccine is developed and mass-distributed.
So .... without massive testing or a vaccine, all Texas schools and colleges should remain closed this Fall regardless of the number of statewide infections or hospitalizations?
histag10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
saltydog13 said:

agrab86 said:

saltydog13 said:

Touch
Sounds potentially naughty, but it could be an accidental cause of in-home death.

I wish I had the laughing/crying emoji. Damn autocorrect. It was supposed to be touche


You have a star. Why do you not have the laugh/cry emoji?
isitjustme
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I figured as much but it was but it was too good a set up to pass up. Touche back to you (totally wrong use of this word, I know)

Note, the e with the accent won't show up once posted.
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah I realized it wasn't autocorrect, but the e just won't post to texags
Cancelled
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What a ridiculous "question" posed by the above poster! I have to sign a contract to enjoy my constitutional rights? Lol! So many willing to hide in their caves because the medicine man told them that the eclipse will kill them.

I'm fine with YOU staying home. Stock up and live off of grub hub for all I care. But don't come asking for a handout when you can't afford your mortgage. Of course, this isn't the case - those that are asserting the need to stay home indefinitely are more than likely either already dependent on the govt through some sort of dole or independently wealthy.

FWIW: there likely won't be a vaccine in January 2021, so the reason for keeping school closed will remain. These morons would keep us closed until 2022 if it meant they could be "safe." What a disgusting word these days.
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
histag10 said:

saltydog13 said:

agrab86 said:

saltydog13 said:

Touch
Sounds potentially naughty, but it could be an accidental cause of in-home death.

I wish I had the laughing/crying emoji. Damn autocorrect. It was supposed to be touche


You have a star. Why do you not have the laugh/cry emoji?
I'm not sure why I have a star. I'm just on the free account, but have had a start for the longest time
histag10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now its gone...
saltydog13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancelled
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What is gone?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.