What's the name of the hospital? I will call them and get answers to your question.

(11-29-2020 12:26 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 10:45 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 07:33 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-28-2020 01:36 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-28-2020 12:57 PM)InterestedX Wrote:  I'd be interested to hear you tell us where these qualified nurses who aren't already employed can be found.

Maybe they need to run an ad or something? Craigslist?

I know where one is - my ex-wife. I'll gladly give you her number.


I'd be interested how you know that every single nurse in a county of over 1.8 milliion is already employed and working maximum overtime. Where were they when they started the construction?

Of course there could be shortages in doctors, janitorial staff, security guards, X-ray techs, kitchen staff, whatever. Why just nurses? Is this what CNN is telling you? Or there could be budget problems, or it could have a rodent problem. Could be poison water from fracking (It's next to an field of gas wells). I don't know why it is not open for business. That's why I asked. But the fact remains - there is an empty hospital standing unused.and we are complaining about crowded hospitals.

Note to the liberals: Next time you complain about the tone on here, remember this guy.

Ummm... these are the two posts that InterestedX made that apparently offended you so heavily?

Quote:Maybe they can't staff it. I hear there's quite a shortage of nurses due to some flu or something.

Quote:I'd be interested to hear you tell us where these qualified nurses who aren't already employed can be found.

Maybe they need to run an ad or something? Craigslist?

Really? That's what has you up in arms?
Perhaps you should go back and look at Tanq's last few responses to Lad and see how they compare those above.

Once again, assumptions are made. Once again, incorrect ones.

That was not a defense of Tanq’s manner - it was to point out that we are not the sole offenders. Yet it is only the lefties who hold their noses and run away. I guess the righties are made of sterner stuff.

Yes... it was truly a Profiles in Courage moment when you were apparently offended by InterestedX's relatively innocuous comments. We liberals must strive to attain such "stern stuff". We all feel like complete snowflakes in the face of this gritty display of fortitude.

I see you are following X's footsteps with the snark. Seems to be standard with you guys - complain and then copy.I cannot give you guys any more credit for being offended. Poor babies...run home and hide.

What's the name of the hospital? I will call them and get answers to your question.

(11-29-2020 10:34 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 07:27 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO... do you really think that the hospital you have referenced has not opened because there are not enough patients for them to do any business?

I mean... that doesn't really make sense???

If the doors are closed (and construction inside is actually completed) I would assume that there is some sort of licensing issue.

The numbers of Texas hospital/ICU beds being taken up due to COVID have been increasing and seem to be hitting a critical level. Is your take that the MSM media has pushed forward this false negative and that hospitals are actually not busy at all?

I'm trying to understand your point with this one.

Maybe X made the same mistake you did.

I didn’t say or imply there are not enough patients for them to do
business. Where did y’all come upwith that?

If there was enough need to to fund the building of the hospital in the first place, there certainly was not less need after Covid hit. I think you and X did not think this through if you thought I was saying there was not enough need.

My question was why, with the reported overwhelming of hospitals, one that was brand new was allowed to stand unused.

Certainly it goes back to the original question of why it isn't open yet. If it is a licensing issue... are you suggesting that the normal licensing process for hospitals be suspended due to these extreme circumstances?

Quote:X, in his own smarmy way, suggested one possible reason - staffing issues.

I certainly understand there could be staffing issues, and if X had just offered that possible reason without the smarm, I would have just thanked him for his input.

Perhaps also, the administrators did not want to contaminate a pristine facility.

My guess is that the monetary bloodbath that would result keeping the doors closed on a facility that would otherwise be ready to be up and running makes this unlikely.

Quote:Perhaps there is also a shortage of support staff - cooks, launderers, security, office, intake.

I find it ludicrous that he urges me to stop at a closed facility and wander the halls until challenged. I don’t need an answer so much that I am willing to go to jail for it.

I hope this clears it up for you. Your puzzlement is based on a false assumption of my supposed question.

I'm still not completely understanding how you connected this hospital that has yet to open the doors to the COVID crisis. To me, it seemed that you were making a point that the COVID situation must not be as dire as the media says it is if there is a hospital with closed doors.

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 10:34 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 07:27 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO... do you really think that the hospital you have referenced has not opened because there are not enough patients for them to do any business?

I mean... that doesn't really make sense???

If the doors are closed (and construction inside is actually completed) I would assume that there is some sort of licensing issue.

The numbers of Texas hospital/ICU beds being taken up due to COVID have been increasing and seem to be hitting a critical level. Is your take that the MSM media has pushed forward this false negative and that hospitals are actually not busy at all?

I'm trying to understand your point with this one.

Maybe X made the same mistake you did.

I didn’t say or imply there are not enough patients for them to do
business. Where did y’all come upwith that?

If there was enough need to to fund the building of the hospital in the first place, there certainly was not less need after Covid hit. I think you and X did not think this through if you thought I was saying there was not enough need.

My question was why, with the reported overwhelming of hospitals, one that was brand new was allowed to stand unused.

Certainly it goes back to the original question of why it isn't open yet. If it is a licensing issue... are you suggesting that the normal licensing process for hospitals be suspended due to these extreme circumstances?

Quote:X, in his own smarmy way, suggested one possible reason - staffing issues.

I certainly understand there could be staffing issues, and if X had just offered that possible reason without the smarm, I would have just thanked him for his input.

Perhaps also, the administrators did not want to contaminate a pristine facility.

My guess is that the monetary bloodbath that would result keeping the doors closed on a facility that would otherwise be ready to be up and running makes this unlikely.

Quote:Perhaps there is also a shortage of support staff - cooks, launderers, security, office, intake.

I find it ludicrous that he urges me to stop at a closed facility and wander the halls until challenged. I don’t need an answer so much that I am willing to go to jail for it.

I hope this clears it up for you. Your puzzlement is based on a false assumption of my supposed question.

I'm still not completely understanding how you connected this hospital that has yet to open the doors to the COVID crisis. To me, it seemed that you were making a point that the COVID situation must not be as dire as the media says it is if there is a hospital with closed doors.

The only connection was that I had been hearing that hospitals were overwhelmed. I have no idea of if the hospitals in Tarrant county are overwhelmed. I can easily see some bureaucrat deciding to sit on it for some reason known only to him/her. But you and X jumped to conclusions, and went directly to snark. I am a bit surprised at you. X I just put on Ignore, but I am not quite ready to do that with you.

I guess this illustrates the danger on not spelling everything out. On this site, we all have to defend, all too often, not what we said but what other people think they heard.

Is it your intention to never respond my questions in the protest thread? I asked you because you are the only one here I know of who has actually been to, and participated in, a BLM protest. A simple yes or no will suffice. If no, then I will stop asking you.

I haven't read this whole thread, but I think I sense the conversation. As someone with specific experience here... and over wide swaths of the country and not just anecdotally.... there are lots of things going on that most people don't know or think about.

1) SOME hospitals are almost always overwhelmed. They operate at high capacity even during periods where other hospitals are furloughing people. There are a number of reasons for this.
2) SOME hospitals have variable capacity with the ability to furlough entire floors... meaning they can be at 80% capacity, but they can grow their capacity by another 40% under the right circumstances and with the right financial incentives. **Hint... when you open up a new floor, you aren't just making incremental dollars on each patient... instead you are a) having to staff an entire floor, meaning that 1 or 2 patients doesn't justify it, but instead you need 20 (or whatever based on capacity) and b) its not as if we have out of work doctors and other licensed professionals desperate for jobs, licensed in the correct states much less credentialed at the correct hospitals. You most often have to pay AT LEAST overtime wages to these people and often 2-300% of their normal wages plus other incentives... and THAT only happens if you get reimbursed for it BECAUSE you are 'overwhelmed'.. and if Hospital A is overwhelmed and paying 2-3 times your normal wages, you'll even have people 'calling out sick' at Hospital B to take a shift at Hospital A... which of course causes issues for Hospital B.

3) Nursing homes and rehab centers which usually run on very thin margins, especially for non-commercial policies.... have limited capacity so even some recovering patients who would normally be sent there have nowhere to go.... and anyone who is homeless or has little support at home or lives in some sort of group setting similarly can't be sent home even if they normally would be. A couple day stay like Trump had becomes a week long or more stay.

4) throw in all of the additional cleaning and staffing (people now often don't work 'between' departments to avoid potential for spread) and reduced occupancies as a result of COVID and we have all the things we need to justify 'overwhelmed' reimbursement from (mostly) the government.

Its not a scam... but it IS a 'game' of sorts.... and of course the 'scary' story sells newspapers and gets clicks and viewers.

Just as the FDA pushed through all sorts of things related to COVID through in weeks that would normally take months or even years... there are ways around things if the need is great enough.

What most of you seem to be forgetting is all of the 'fear' we were being sold when this all started. If we can set up a military field hospital in a matter of days and if we can set up tents in NYC in a matter of hours and if we can convert non-hospital space for hospital purposes and bring hospital ships to coastal cities... then a completed, but not fully inspected and certified hospital COULD be used for a number of things, including at least housing recovering, non-critical patients... freeing up more critical resources in a fully functioning and certified
hospital to serve.... IF the move is justifiable financially. Let's be blunt... it would be expensive as hell to open a facility... run it at say 30% capacity... then shut it down and clean it up to fully certify it and open it back up again, and all that assumes that you can staff it.

States could lessen a number of their staffing requirements... Nurses could handle a few additional patients... we could authorize CNAs to do a little more... Hospitals could expedite credentialing and even co-opt with other hospitals as most have networks of a sort... We could even use virtual chart review for non-critical patients or at least virtual supervision of NPs and PAs... and suspend the 'patient survey' which focuses on things like, did the provider SIT DOWN to explain things to you or did they stand? ALL SORTS of things can be done under the worst of circumstances... and in each case... we would be at or near capacity, and then suddenly have a lot more capacity.

SOME places are overwhelmed... and intentionally so. By that I mean that cases are being concentrated strategically to limit the spread to other critical non-COVID patients.... that means that your local hospital 'doesn't have a bed' for you... but it doesn't mean that there aren't beds, or couldn't be if other options weren't available. ERs especially can get overwhelmed, but this happened BEFORE COVID. Most of the ACA was designed around alleviating this very issue because of the expense of treating the sniffles in an ER setting, but that all goes away when COVID comes and PCP offices and clinics send you away. SOME places like say El Paso... could be overwhelmed somewhat because they're actually providing healthcare for a multiple of their official population, planning and staffing.

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I'm still not completely understanding

Obviously not.

(11-30-2020 10:46 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I haven't read this whole thread, but I think I sense the conversation. As someone with specific experience here... and over wide swaths of the country and not just anecdotally.... there are lots of things going on that most people don't know or think about.

1) SOME hospitals are almost always overwhelmed. They operate at high capacity even during periods where other hospitals are furloughing people. There are a number of reasons for this.
2) SOME hospitals have variable capacity with the ability to furlough entire floors... meaning they can be at 80% capacity, but they can grow their capacity by another 40% under the right circumstances and with the right financial incentives. **Hint... when you open up a new floor, you aren't just making incremental dollars on each patient... instead you are a) having to staff an entire floor, meaning that 1 or 2 patients doesn't justify it, but instead you need 20 (or whatever based on capacity) and b) its not as if we have out of work doctors and other licensed professionals desperate for jobs, licensed in the correct states much less credentialed at the correct hospitals. You most often have to pay AT LEAST overtime wages to these people and often 2-300% of their normal wages plus other incentives... and THAT only happens if you get reimbursed for it BECAUSE you are 'overwhelmed'.. and if Hospital A is overwhelmed and paying 2-3 times your normal wages, you'll even have people 'calling out sick' at Hospital B to take a shift at Hospital A... which of course causes issues for Hospital B.

3) Nursing homes and rehab centers which usually run on very thin margins, especially for non-commercial policies.... have limited capacity so even some recovering patients who would normally be sent there have nowhere to go.... and anyone who is homeless or has little support at home or lives in some sort of group setting similarly can't be sent home even if they normally would be. A couple day stay like Trump had becomes a week long or more stay.

4) throw in all of the additional cleaning and staffing (people now often don't work 'between' departments to avoid potential for spread) and reduced occupancies as a result of COVID and we have all the things we need to justify 'overwhelmed' reimbursement from (mostly) the government.

Its not a scam... but it IS a 'game' of sorts.... and of course the 'scary' story sells newspapers and gets clicks and viewers.

Just as the FDA pushed through all sorts of things related to COVID through in weeks that would normally take months or even years... there are ways around things if the need is great enough.

What most of you seem to be forgetting is all of the 'fear' we were being sold when this all started. If we can set up a military field hospital in a matter of days and if we can set up tents in NYC in a matter of hours and if we can convert non-hospital space for hospital purposes and bring hospital ships to coastal cities... then a completed, but not fully inspected and certified hospital COULD be used for a number of things, including at least housing recovering, non-critical patients... freeing up more critical resources in a fully functioning and certified
hospital to serve.... IF the move is justifiable financially. Let's be blunt... it would be expensive as hell to open a facility... run it at say 30% capacity... then shut it down and clean it up to fully certify it and open it back up again, and all that assumes that you can staff it.

States could lessen a number of their staffing requirements... Nurses could handle a few additional patients... we could authorize CNAs to do a little more... Hospitals could expedite credentialing and even co-opt with other hospitals as most have networks of a sort... We could even use virtual chart review for non-critical patients or at least virtual supervision of NPs and PAs... and suspend the 'patient survey' which focuses on things like, did the provider SIT DOWN to explain things to you or did they stand? ALL SORTS of things can be done under the worst of circumstances... and in each case... we would be at or near capacity, and then suddenly have a lot more capacity.

SOME places are overwhelmed... and intentionally so. By that I mean that cases are being concentrated strategically to limit the spread to other critical non-COVID patients.... that means that your local hospital 'doesn't have a bed' for you... but it doesn't mean that there aren't beds, or couldn't be if other options weren't available. ERs especially can get overwhelmed, but this happened BEFORE COVID. Most of the ACA was designed around alleviating this very issue because of the expense of treating the sniffles in an ER setting, but that all goes away when COVID comes and PCP offices and clinics send you away. SOME places like say El Paso... could be overwhelmed somewhat because they're actually providing healthcare for a multiple of their official population, planning and staffing.

Thanks Ham When I posted, I was hoping to get a response from you and/or RU. Instead I got self-appointed experts. I think the bolded is the most likely answer to my question. I can see this possibility easily.

Sounds like this may well be a budget decision, rather than a decision forced on the Admin by unavailability of personnel. The hospital itself is a small suburban satellite of a major downtown hospital.

I offered to call and ask the facility why they weren't open. You put me on ignore. Now who is running away and hiding?

Exactly what I have come to expect from you, OO.

(11-30-2020 11:24 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Thanks Ham When I posted, I was hoping to get a response from you and/or RU. Instead I got self-appointed experts. I think the bolded is the most likely answer to my question. I can see this possibility easily.

Sounds like this may well be a budget decision, rather than a decision forced on the Admin by unavailability of personnel. The hospital itself is a small suburban satellite of a major downtown hospital.

Sorry... Holidays and all.

This is the thing... People like us look at 90% capacity and freak out... unaware that hospitals can go to 110% capacity or even more (sometimes a LOT more) under the right circumstances... and of course patients can be moved.... but it is expensive and/or has legal or reimbursement issues.... or even just PR... That's our model and it works surprisingly well. We were designed for things like an oil plant explosion or a huge train derailment which are mostly location based... and not a pandemic which can be, or may not be.

El Paso likely has lots of excess as a result of the frequent border crossings (often for healthcare) and the high trucking/rail risks... these are now being used for COVID as they are really the only decent sized place for many many miles.... especially for 'Texas' but not NM Medicaid plans. NY/NJ has similar problems where someone who works and pays into NY Medicaid can't get SOME covered care in Jersey where they live, or vice versa.

Where you are, I suspect that if they NEEDED it, they could manage it... but there are large costs involved... so it suits their argument to have CMS, the state or the feds to address the issue with money and waivers.... and not simply to pay up to 'rush' capacity into use.

(11-30-2020 09:57 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 10:34 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 07:27 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO... do you really think that the hospital you have referenced has not opened because there are not enough patients for them to do any business?

I mean... that doesn't really make sense???

If the doors are closed (and construction inside is actually completed) I would assume that there is some sort of licensing issue.

The numbers of Texas hospital/ICU beds being taken up due to COVID have been increasing and seem to be hitting a critical level. Is your take that the MSM media has pushed forward this false negative and that hospitals are actually not busy at all?

I'm trying to understand your point with this one.

Maybe X made the same mistake you did.

I didn’t say or imply there are not enough patients for them to do
business. Where did y’all come upwith that?

If there was enough need to to fund the building of the hospital in the first place, there certainly was not less need after Covid hit. I think you and X did not think this through if you thought I was saying there was not enough need.

My question was why, with the reported overwhelming of hospitals, one that was brand new was allowed to stand unused.

Certainly it goes back to the original question of why it isn't open yet. If it is a licensing issue... are you suggesting that the normal licensing process for hospitals be suspended due to these extreme circumstances?

Quote:X, in his own smarmy way, suggested one possible reason - staffing issues.

I certainly understand there could be staffing issues, and if X had just offered that possible reason without the smarm, I would have just thanked him for his input.

Perhaps also, the administrators did not want to contaminate a pristine facility.

My guess is that the monetary bloodbath that would result keeping the doors closed on a facility that would otherwise be ready to be up and running makes this unlikely.

Quote:Perhaps there is also a shortage of support staff - cooks, launderers, security, office, intake.

I find it ludicrous that he urges me to stop at a closed facility and wander the halls until challenged. I don’t need an answer so much that I am willing to go to jail for it.

I hope this clears it up for you. Your puzzlement is based on a false assumption of my supposed question.

I'm still not completely understanding how you connected this hospital that has yet to open the doors to the COVID crisis. To me, it seemed that you were making a point that the COVID situation must not be as dire as the media says it is if there is a hospital with closed doors.

The only connection was that I had been hearing that hospitals were overwhelmed. I have no idea of if the hospitals in Tarrant county are overwhelmed. I can easily see some bureaucrat deciding to sit on it for some reason known only to him/her. But you and X jumped to conclusions, and went directly to snark. I am a bit surprised at you. X I just put on Ignore, but I am not quite ready to do that with you.

If you go back and look I responded to your hospital post with ZERO snark.

Separately I did chide you for being snowflakey regarding InterestedX's comments so if you want to put me on ignore for that then have at it.

Quote:I guess this illustrates the danger on not spelling everything out. On this site, we all have to defend, all too often, not what we said but what other people think they heard.

Is it your intention to never respond my questions in the protest thread? I asked you because you are the only one here I know of who has actually been to, and participated in, a BLM protest. A simple yes or no will suffice. If no, then I will stop asking you.

Just haven't had time to catch up. Let me go back and find those.

(11-30-2020 10:56 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I'm still not completely understanding

Obviously not.

Thank you for this valuable contribution.

(11-30-2020 12:39 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 11:24 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Thanks Ham When I posted, I was hoping to get a response from you and/or RU. Instead I got self-appointed experts. I think the bolded is the most likely answer to my question. I can see this possibility easily.

Sounds like this may well be a budget decision, rather than a decision forced on the Admin by unavailability of personnel. The hospital itself is a small suburban satellite of a major downtown hospital.

Sorry... Holidays and all.

This is the thing... People like us look at 90% capacity and freak out... unaware that hospitals can go to 110% capacity or even more (sometimes a LOT more) under the right circumstances... and of course patients can be moved.... but it is expensive and/or has legal or reimbursement issues.... or even just PR... That's our model and it works surprisingly well. We were designed for things like an oil plant explosion or a huge train derailment which are mostly location based... and not a pandemic which can be, or may not be.

El Paso likely has lots of excess as a result of the frequent border crossings (often for healthcare) and the high trucking/rail risks... these are now being used for COVID as they are really the only decent sized place for many many miles.... especially for 'Texas' but not NM Medicaid plans. NY/NJ has similar problems where someone who works and pays into NY Medicaid can't get SOME covered care in Jersey where they live, or vice versa.

Where you are, I suspect that if they NEEDED it, they could manage it... but there are large costs involved... so it suits their argument to have CMS, the state or the feds to address the issue with money and waivers.... and not simply to pay up to 'rush' capacity into use.

What Ham said.

It is a game. The larger entities are using this as a power grab to consolidate business and increase profits. They leverage the rules to squeeze out competition. They ask for exemptions to certain rules if it helps them and ask to enforce other rules if it hurts the competition.

Hospitals have always tried to keep capacity to 90+% for efficiency (maximize profits). There are built in built in contingencies for short term surges.

Honestly, large entities use people as fodder for a big game of chicken to gain a financial advantage. COVID has just made it more apparent to most and the media has done their best to stoke the flames of fear which only helps the rich get richer.

Someone is going to look foolish in a few weeks - either the folks saying Covid is being blown out of proportion or the folks predicting the death totals are going to double or even triple because of Thanksgiving gatherings.

I think in an average day in the U.S., there are about 7500 deaths (based on this link -- https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/h...onavirus/_

We hit 2000 deaths in a day a week ago or so from Covid - whether you think they're all Covid or not, I think we can all agree that 2000 people did die that somehow figured into the stats. So my question is at what point does a death total become significant?

Personally I think 2000 is pretty significant to start with. That's about 27 percent of the deaths in the U.S. on a given day. Certainly there are going to be quite a few deaths (car accidents, homicides, etc.) that never will be attributed to Covid. Maybe you need to see 3000 or even 4000 in a day if you don't believe the numbers. But if the numbers do get higher, I think even people who don't consider Covid to be a serious medical issue are going to have to take notice.

(11-30-2020 07:03 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Someone is going to look foolish in a few weeks - either the folks saying Covid is being blown out of proportion or the folks predicting the death totals are going to double or even triple because of Thanksgiving gatherings.

I think a lot of folks, including me, fall into the middle on this.

personally, I wear my mask and practice social distancing, but I go where I need to go without thinking I am moving into a war zone. I am a high risk guy - if anybody should quiver with fear, it is me. But I think reasonable precautions should produce reasonable results.

The saying is there are three kinds of lies. The third kind is statistics. Certainly stats can be manipulated and are subject to interpretation. I don't trust either side on this. I think both sides are ballyhooing the stats they want emphasized.

(11-30-2020 01:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 10:56 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I'm still not completely understanding

Obviously not.

Thank you for this valuable contribution.

The reason you didn't understand was that you read something into my statements that was not there.

(11-30-2020 10:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 07:03 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Someone is going to look foolish in a few weeks - either the folks saying Covid is being blown out of proportion or the folks predicting the death totals are going to double or even triple because of Thanksgiving gatherings.

I think a lot of folks, including me, fall into the middle on this.

personally, I wear my mask and practice social distancing, but I go where I need to go without thinking I am moving into a war zone. I am a high risk guy - if anybody should quiver with fear, it is me. But I think reasonable precautions should produce reasonable results.

The saying is there are three kinds of lies. The third kind is statistics. Certainly stats can be manipulated and are subject to interpretation. I don't trust either side on this. I think both sides are ballyhooing the stats they want emphasized.

I agree with you OO. Perhaps a middle ground should be more realistic. The problem is that it’s a new virus. With new parameters regarding its biology that we are just finding out. Most of its true nature won’t be worked out for another year or two, after the reliable data is analyzed minutely and the virology labs are through with the details.
And I also agree that personal behavior in this pandemic is completely related to one’s tolerance for risk. Sort of like assessing the need for insurance.
I’m in the higher risk group. As is my wife. My risk assessment is influenced by those factors, as well as my daily conversations with my colleagues on the front line in the local hospitals.
Because of that I’m hiding out and isolating as much as possible.
Others have a different risk assessment. I may disagree with that assessment. But I learned months ago that I should respect it.

(11-30-2020 01:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 10:56 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 09:16 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I'm still not completely understanding

Obviously not.

Thank you for this valuable contribution.

Well, if you don't make a valid attempt to understand, you probably won't.

Hint: Pay attention to what is actually said, instead of trying so hard to spin it into whatever you want to argue with.

(11-30-2020 11:59 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 10:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-30-2020 07:03 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Someone is going to look foolish in a few weeks - either the folks saying Covid is being blown out of proportion or the folks predicting the death totals are going to double or even triple because of Thanksgiving gatherings.

I think a lot of folks, including me, fall into the middle on this.

personally, I wear my mask and practice social distancing, but I go where I need to go without thinking I am moving into a war zone. I am a high risk guy - if anybody should quiver with fear, it is me. But I think reasonable precautions should produce reasonable results.

The saying is there are three kinds of lies. The third kind is statistics. Certainly stats can be manipulated and are subject to interpretation. I don't trust either side on this. I think both sides are ballyhooing the stats they want emphasized.

I agree with you OO. Perhaps a middle ground should be more realistic. The problem is that it’s a new virus. With new parameters regarding its biology that we are just finding out. Most of its true nature won’t be worked out for another year or two, after the reliable data is analyzed minutely and the virology labs are through with the details.
And I also agree that personal behavior in this pandemic is completely related to one’s tolerance for risk. Sort of like assessing the need for insurance.
I’m in the higher risk group. As is my wife. My risk assessment is influenced by those factors, as well as my daily conversations with my colleagues on the front line in the local hospitals.
Because of that I’m hiding out and isolating as much as possible.
Others have a different risk assessment. I may disagree with that assessment. But I learned months ago that I should respect it.

I think a tough part of this, is that at some point, someone’s risk tolerance can have a negative outcome on others and the spread of the virus. And so it is the role of the government to provide directions on when to say that X activities are too risky for the public good (kind of like the ban on indoor smoking in public places). Ideally, you would have a group of experts evaluating risk profiles for various activities and adjusting where that line falls as new information is obtained.

One problem is that the federal government has dropped the ball on making sure that those industries affected the most by restrictions (like bars), are cared for and not left out to dry.

(12-01-2020 05:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Ideally, you would have a group of experts evaluating risk profiles for various activities and adjusting where that line falls as new information is obtained.

The problem is that that group of experts has a name--Big Brother.

And we had a group of "experts" this time that were pretty consistently wrong. Maybe we needed different experts.