What's new
By:

Coronavirus

Zombie said:


Can explain to me what this means?
Click to expand...


i think he means ceasing the social distancing stuff and restarting the economy. In Donald’s view, attempting to slow the spread of this disease by shutting our economy down (the cure) might be worse than the disease because the stock market is plunging and unemployment is skyrocketing. In typical Donald trump fashion, he doesn’t care about people, only himself and money.

btw, I agree that at some point we need to restart our economy. But we barely started the social distancing and testing stuff. We can’t cut and run from slowing this disease quite yet. Not until we’ve revamped our economy to produce ventilators, provide medical protection, and testing. The pandemic is already bad. But going back to “life as usual” prematurely will only exacerbate this pandemic.

this is what trumpworld is saying already:

 
Zombie said:


Can explain to me what this means?
Click to expand...


donald doesn’t care about flattening the curve. He cares about what’s happening to the stock market and its effect on his re-election. I have a feeling @Zombie that this was a sad yet clear look inside Trumpworld’s view of the situation:



“Stay at work!”

who cares if you get sick, drown in hospital bills, overwhelm our health care system, or die? Keep working so I can get re-elected!
 
His supporters seem to have interpreted it my way...








get your asses back to work. Who gives a **** how sick you get or how many die? I can’t get re-elected if the economy crashes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fishonjazz said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/harsh-steps-needed-stop-coronavirus-114040150.html

This article has quite a few good ideas about things to stop/slow the pandemic that have worked elsewhere.

Interestingly it says that closing schools is a bad idea.

I like the part about declaring a war against this virus and using all these idle people who arent working to volunteer to help fight it and do contact tracing.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

The article was clearly written by someone who didn't contact anyone in education.

As someone who still works in public education but at a higher level now, it was obvious that schools needed to shut down.

Parents were taking kids out of schools, educators were missing out of fear of getting sick/bringing it home to immune-compromised/at risk relatives, and attempting to get subs during a pandemic was impossible. While there wasn't widespread spreading of Coronavirus at the time of the Governor's closing of our schools two weeks ago, the writing was on the wall. It was becoming a struggle just to keep schools functioning.

The issue was less about protecting the kids but on protecting adults and families. Would many Utah students die from this? Probably not. But their parents would then be saddled with expensive medical bills. Their families would now be infected. School employees would then miss weeks recovering. Potential for death...

Besides, our testing has been so poor, are we really going to base any decisions on our porous testing rates? If we did that, most of our states would still be open with business as usual. Should we have waited until principals and teachers were dying off before we closed them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top