Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 284: NYSE Guys Finish Last

(+) Yeah! (+)

Nelson_Mandela posted...

I'm glad the government is paying people not to work (though the states taking the most extreme measures should foot the bill for their constituents). It's slightly less authoritarian than just closing all private enterprise and telling wage workers to fuck off.

But I still feel this damage and precedent is irreparable.

They haven't closed any private enterprise though.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Broke: Electing Hillary Clinton as President

Woke: Electing Donald Trump and getting UBI because he fucks up a pandemic response

Accelerationists vindicated

that's a great win condition for me!
and there's likely gonna be an expansion of government involvement with emergency healthcare long term after this, maybe AOC and Cruz can work on their "fuck the pharmaceutical companies" bill together like they've wanted to for a while.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Broke: Electing Hillary Clinton as President

Woke: Electing Donald Trump and getting UBI because he fucks up a pandemic response

Accelerationists vindicated

I'm hoping this is a joke because hundreds more at minimum are going to die because Trump is an idiot and I know at least one person in this topic series won't take this as a joke.

It's obviously a joke, but like any good joke there's an element of truth to it.

I'm not making light of anybody at risk, so nobody get mad.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

but like any good joke there's an element of truth to it.

doubt

---

yeah, it's just taking the positive aspects and running with it.


---

Wouldn't need any UBI if the outbreak had been stopped before it took off

---

and just you wait guys.
once this is all over, a new healthcare system will be made: Donaldcare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K_VxtSH94g


---

Well, no, we WOULD still need UBI! Thats the entire point
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Well, no, we WOULD still need UBI! Thats the entire point

LotM just made my point so much harder than I could ever have dreamed.

---

Wanglicious posted...

once this is all over, a new healthcare system will be made: Donaldcare.

I mean, the plan was sit and pray coronavirus just blows away.

Thats pretty much sititng there hoping donald -might- heal you already.

---

But you're not gonna get UBI. You're getting temporary UBI, which is a bailout mitigating problems caused by the coronavirus.

---

Hillary would have done a better job dealing with the virus from the start, but I doubt her administration would have been able to completely prevent it from happening. (Did Trump cause all the issues in other countries?) Meanwhile, the economy would be completely fucked as the GOP would have complete control of Congress and would refuse to do anything about it so Hillary would look bad before the upcoming election.

...I'd still rather have Hillary as president for many obvious reasons, but I'm really not sure she'd do much better with the current situation.
---

Xeybozn posted...

Hillary would have done a better job dealing with the virus from the start, but I doubt her administration would have been able to completely prevent it from happening. (Did Trump cause all the issues in other countries?) Meanwhile, the economy would be completely fucked as the GOP would have complete control of Congress and would refuse to do anything about it so Hillary would look bad before the upcoming election.

...I'd still rather have Hillary as president for many obvious reasons, but I'm really not sure she'd do much better with the current situation.

Oh I agree that she wouldn't have been able to prevent it from affecting America, but I think she plausibly could have gotten it under control with a South Korea style solution (mass testing and tracking with temperature scanning) that would have potentially eliminated the need for total lockdowns. Trump wasted months of prep time that Hillary would have surely made use of.

---

HeroicCrono posted...

They haven't closed any private enterprise though.

Restaurants and bars are closed where I live

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Restaurants and bars are closed where I live

Same here:

Maryland bars, restaurants, movie theaters and gyms closed their doors Monday under an unprecedented order by Gov. Larry Hogan designed to slow the coronavirus outbreak, which he said is going to be much worse than most people expect.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh I agree that she wouldn't have been able to prevent it from affecting America, but I think she plausibly could have gotten it under control with a South Korea style solution (mass testing and tracking with temperature scanning) that would have potentially eliminated the need for total lockdowns. Trump wasted months of prep time that Hillary would have surely made use of.

Hillary wouldn't have had months of prep time, she would have kept our borders open and we'd have hit contagion at or before Italy and South Korea.

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Restaurants and bars are closed where I live

Question: would you support these shutdowns if the coronavirus had, say, a 10% mortality rate? 30%? Is this type of government action always unacceptable, or just not worth it for you for the current situation?

---

HeroicCrono posted...

Hillary wouldn't have had months of prep time, she would have kept our borders open and we'd have hit contagion at or before Italy and South Korea.

I don't think there's reason to be confident of that. Also the evidence suggests it did come to the US in January (in Seattle at least, but I'm sure other places too).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

But you're not gonna get UBI. You're getting temporary UBI, which is a bailout mitigating problems caused by the coronavirus.

why are you the way that you are


---

I think people forget that if the Democrats had Presidential power right now they'd be shoving the issue of health care in the face of the public every time the Republicans said no and we'd be far closer to an M4A-style legislation than we are right now(M4A is...not remotely close to passable right now).

Right now the biggest voice the public has is a "Task force" that doesn't believe in social distancing telling them this is the greatest pandemic response the world has ever seen(We are already inferior to South Korea on this specific pandemic).

---

Also remember that Hillary's response to the Benghazi crisis was to blame a Youtube video.

---

oh my god LotM

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh I agree that she wouldn't have been able to prevent it from affecting America, but I think she plausibly could have gotten it under control with a South Korea style solution (mass testing and tracking with temperature scanning) that would have potentially eliminated the need for total lockdowns. Trump wasted months of prep time that Hillary would have surely made use of.

Plausibly? Not really. I think it's severely doubtful we could have had it under control anywhere close to the degree South Korea does. There's a unique combination of less privacy (WAY more CTV and civilian tracking in Korea) a better medical system, and just overall a different culture that makes their response better than anything the US could have done.

Trump obviously fucked up, but I don't think the US was set up to succeed here regardless of president.

---

Yeah, believing the US could have achieved South Korea like results is asinine.

Want to know what the US would have been like under neoliberal government? Look to France, Germany, etc. They all have Hillary clones running the show and they aren't doing any better than we are.

---

VintageGin posted...

Plausibly? Not really. I think it's severely doubtful we could have had it under control anywhere close to the degree South Korea does. There's a unique combination of less privacy (WAY more CTV and civilian tracking in Korea) a better medical system, and just overall a different culture that makes their response better than anything the US could have done.

Trump obviously fucked up, but I don't think the US was set up to succeed here regardless of president.

We could have literally just imported their test.

The biggest failure we've had in response so far is the lack of testing.

---

SmartMuffin posted...

Yeah, believing the US could have achieved South Korea like results is asinine.

Want to know what the US would have been like under neoliberal government? Look to France, Germany, etc. They all have Hillary clones running the show and they aren't doing any better than we are.

Muffin is correct here. France and Germany are basically Hillary clones.

---

SmartMuffin posted...

Yeah, believing the US could have achieved South Korea like results is asinine.

Want to know what the US would have been like under neoliberal government? Look to France, Germany, etc. They all have Hillary clones running the show and they aren't doing any better than we are.

Did those clones tell half the population of their countries that the disease was just a hoax designed to make them look bad, thus pushing people to be more reckless about how they reacted to health and safety protocols?

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Question: would you support these shutdowns if the coronavirus had, say, a 10% mortality rate? 30%? Is this type of government action always unacceptable, or just not worth it for you for the current situation?

Never. People can CHOOSE stay inside on their own accord if they want. Viruses aren't spreading through the cracks under the doors.

---

And the hallmark of "moderate" government is the unwillingness to do anything decisive that causes change. You're kidding yourself if you think Hillary would have taken decisive action here.

Sephy, fair enough about bars and restaurants. Would you think differently if we are looking at a 60k national death toll?

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Never. People can CHOOSE stay inside on their own accord if they want. Viruses aren't spreading through the cracks under the doors.

This person choosing to stay inside has a medical emergency (let's say, a minor heart attack).

They now essentially are a victim of coronavirus because there are no hospitals now.

Okay. Let me rephrase. Sephy, if China had shut down Wuhan in say, late December 2019, this entire global pandemic would likely have been prevented. Would that be acceptable and do you blame China for not doing that?

---

Inviso posted...

Did those clones tell half the population of their countries that the disease was just a hoax designed to make them look bad, thus pushing people to be more reckless about how they reacted to health and safety protocols?

Let's be real, if Hillary told the country to stay inside, or went so far as to enforce a quarantine, you KNOW people would be recklessly fighting that.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Let's be real, if Hillary told the country to stay inside, or went so far as to enforce a quarantine, you KNOW people would be recklessly fighting that.

She would immediately be impeached if she tried to do that (the House would definitely be Republican if she were president).

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Let's be real, if Hillary told the country to stay inside, or went so far as to enforce a quarantine, you KNOW people would be recklessly fighting that.

How is this in any way comparable

---

Let's be real, if Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, or any democrat told the country to stay inside or went to enforce a quarantine, people would be recklessly fighting it because that's what Fox News told them.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Let's be real, if Hillary told the country to stay inside, or went so far as to enforce a quarantine, you KNOW people would be recklessly fighting that.

That would be a failing of the people fighting it, not Hillary.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

How is this in any way comparable

How is it not?

red13n posted...

Let's be real, if Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, or any democrat told the country to stay inside or went to enforce a quarantine, people would be recklessly fighting it because that's what Fox News told them.

Yeah this is 100% true

---

Also, Sephy or anyone else:

Would you support the creation of an international fund, in which rich countries pay into, so that areas in which there is a disease outbreak can be contained at a very early stage and their residents can continue to be paid their normal wages. For a microscopic fraction of the decline in the stock market in the US alone, we could have paid everyone in Wuhan their normal wages to stay home for the month of January and averted all this disaster.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

How is it not?

Because one example is trying to do the right thing and it's idiots ignoring them, while the other example isn't trying at all and is outright encouraging people to be idiots. Completely different responses. The result may end up the same, but that's not the fault of the one responding, in those examples.

---

https://twitter.com/latimes/status/1239903858412982274?s=19

Please shut down ICEis.

StealThisSheen posted...

Because one example is trying to do the right thing and it's idiots ignoring them, while the other example isn't trying at all and is outright encouraging people to be idiots. Completely different responses. The result may end up the same, but that's not the fault of the one responding, in those examples.

Fair

---

https://twitter.com/jangelooff/status/1239986306308083717?s=21

I really want to know what the means testing is for this
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/jangelooff/status/1239986306308083717?s=21

I really want to know what the means testing is for this

Maybe the same as for green card marriages.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/jangelooff/status/1239986306308083717?s=21

I really want to know what the means testing is for this

Why does this need to be banned? This seems stupid

---

why you need to ban getting into cars with strangers seems pretty obvious to me.

---

Primary update: Biden crushed in Florida as expected; currently he's up 61 to 23 (with 9 for Bloomberg) with 82% reporting.

In Illinois Biden is up 60 to 33 with 4% reporting; the AP has called it for Joe.

---

red13n posted...

why you need to ban getting into cars with strangers seems pretty obvious to me.

Who is it trying to protect? If it's trying to protect the driver, halving the number of passengers in theory halves the risk you'll be exposed to an infected person, which would be logical except the passengers would presumably split into different cars, which naively gives the same effective risk of *some* driver getting infected. If it's the converse, protecting the passengers from the driver, the same logic applies. Ridesharing should just be banned in general then.

If it's trying to protect the passengers from each other, which is a little silly, considering that they'll likely be spending time with each other in close quarters anyway, or already had been.

---

https://twitter.com/LABasedComedian/status/1240039257219067905?s=19

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

https://twitter.com/LABasedComedian/status/1240039257219067905?s=19

I can report from Northern California that here there are still plenty of cars on the streets. Businesses are mostly still open. Restaurants are doing take out only. Bars are closed by order but that's fine by me - prohibition of alcohol is an old plank in the Republican platform anyway.

---