Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

https://twitter.com/timscharks/statu...070727168?s=21

Can a President over rule a governor as to em's state?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

https://twitter.com/timscharks/statu...070727168?s=21

https://twitter.com/jduffyrice/statu...75452183621633

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Can a President over rule a governor as to em's state?

As a matter of law, no. As a matter of public opinion, if Trump persuades his base to disregard what state and local officials are saying, what can they do? Their leadership works because people want to be led.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tom Friedman's approach seems to depend on levels of cooperation, compliance and national leadership that seem lacking.



That would have been great, but because the federal government screwed up the testing for so long, we now don't have the resources to do that. We don't have the tests, we don't have the healthcare workers, we don't have the equipment to protect them, and we also don't have the antivirals. Why not just hypothesize a magical pony that will make the virus go away?

If only we had two months notice to prepare....

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

As a matter of law, no. As a matter of public opinion, if Trump persuades his base to disregard what state and local officials are saying, what can they do? Their leadership works because people want to be led.

And if the man were capable of thinking beyond his nose, he might see how a pandemic spreading at disproportionate rates through his supporters is bad for him personally...

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

What do people mean when they refer to the "economy?" Are they talking about just the stock market? Or are they talking about the effect a depression/recession will have on American lives/businesses? Putting millions of people out of work. Putting companies that will never come back out of business. Destroying the economic lives of 10x (just throwing that number out there) the amount of people who may perish. Should we destroy the economy to save 10 lives? 100? 1000? 100,000? Again, just thinking out loud - not promoting this position. It's just the econ-based part of my brain that thinks about these things in a cost/benefit way..the other parts of my brain think this part is disgusting.

Or the question is whether we are going to preserve the economy, rather than just sharpening up the guillotines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9wi0cPrU4U

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Or the question is whether we are going to preserve the economy, rather than just sharpening up the guillotines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9wi0cPrU4U

The Dow Jones is now up over 10% from it's lows - it is a miraculous Trump recovery!!!

[Icky Thump]

Getting tested may seem like a responsible thing to do but I am wondering when they will start rounding up the positive lab tests for Fema death camps. Currently, some jurisdictions have set up infinite quarantines for positive lab tests ONLY, while the myriad of people who are just coughing and toughing it out and riding the subway.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

After reading The World is Flat I promised myself that I'd never read anything written by Friedman ever again.

He's like David Brooks, a simp. Vanilla, dull witted, insight for the clueless.

What is significant is that someone as studiously inoffensive as Friedman would take even a slightly aggressive position about reopening the economy.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tom Friedman's approach seems to depend on levels of cooperation, compliance and national leadership that seem lacking.



That would have been great, but because the federal government screwed up the testing for so long, we now don't have the resources to do that. We don't have the tests, we don't have the healthcare workers, we don't have the equipment to protect them, and we also don't have the antivirals. Why not just hypothesize a magical pony that will make the virus go away?

Agreed on both. But the point made is that the NYTimes, and particularly Friedman, who as I noted above is a lickspittle centrist of the most useless kind, are asking whether the economic cost is too high.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Getting tested may seem like a responsible thing to do but I am wondering when they will start rounding up the positive lab tests for Fema death camps. Currently, some jurisdictions have set up infinite quarantines for positive lab tests ONLY, while the myriad of people who are just coughing and toughing it out and riding the subway.

We've a couple friends with it now, one who's got health issues. I'm advised it's a bit unnerving when you've trouble catching breath, but that seems to pass quickly. Mostly it's just malaise and a headache.

The cruise line inspectors said they found Covid lasts for up to 17 days on surfaces in cabins.

So, we're all probably going to get it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Or the question is whether we are going to preserve the economy, rather than just sharpening up the guillotines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9wi0cPrU4U

If that $425 billion fund Mnuchin is overseeing turns out to be a goody basket for large corps who suck up to the Administration to use to engage in buybacks all over again, I think you may see the sharpening tools come out.

I just read a headline, "White House Agrees to Allow Oversight of Bailout Fund." There was a time when there wasn't oversight? Channeling Jon Stewart, "Whaaaa?"

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The Dow Jones is now up over 10% from it's lows - it is a miraculous Trump recovery!!!

Sell/short. This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Wall Street are who is buying because Wall Street thinks it understands stimulus. This is beyond Wall Street's ken and you should take advantage of it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Agreed on both. But the point made is that the NYTimes, and particularly Friedman, who as I noted above is a lickspittle centrist of the most useless kind, are asking whether the economic cost is too high.

I think they have their heads in their asses about the economic costs of letting the virus run its course.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think they have their heads in their asses about the economic costs of letting the virus run its course.

I don't think the counter to them is easy to make. What you effectively have to say is:

Hundreds of dead docs and nurses which we can't afford
Italy-like death tolls x 5.5, adjusting for population difference
Total shutdown of most cities
Riots, looting, etc.
Widespread civil unrest
Stock market cratering to below 10k

It's basically like describing Children of Men, or some similar dystopian future movie.