General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

whyamimrpink78
CNN
comments

Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "CNN" channel.

Previous
2
Next
...
All

Bernie is a hypocrite. He says we need to discuss the healthcare bill the republicans are working on, and I agree. But with him the end goal is medicare for all. He doesn't want a discussion, he just wants to push for his communist system.
2
@matthewkheyfets1309 , yes. The scary part is that those pushing for M4A are not being honest here and they deflect every criticism about it as people are simply corrupt. I will be honest, maybe M4A is the best solution for us, I highly doubt it but I will be willing to listen if those who support are honest. They aren't. This is a great video on that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e893Ky7iM6Y&t=314s
2
Bernie, when does the government become too big?
2
And it will fail like his presidential campaign.
2
This is why we are divided as a nation. When Jan. 6th happened what would have brought unity would have asked why so many voted for Trump? And why did so many get angry and stormed the capital? Instead they are dismissed. Now add in the lies of what happened Jan. 6th from the left and you have a divided nation. This is a terrible speech by Biden and further divides us.
2
Fauci is becoming less reliable. He is simply fear mongering to remain relevant.
2
@pidayrocks2235 it is more complex than that. You can't do your analysis and say that is the official mortality rate. To start, not everyone who got the virus sought out medical care. Next, if you look at NY data, around 4% of deaths were of people who were 44 and younger. Of those around 1/7 had no underlying conditions. Thus, 1/7 of 4% is around 0.5%. That means if you are fairly young and healthy you have around a 0.5% chance of dying. And again, that is of reported cases of those who actually sought out healthcare. Consider the people who got it and simply dealt with it. And recent research out of Germany suggests that around 30% already have an immunity to this virus due to prior infections from other coronaviruses.
2
@pidayrocks2235 also, according to the CDC more have died from pneumonia. And no, you can't do basic statistics as you simply can't look at confirmed cases and confirmed deaths as the issue is far more complex than that. So no, you are not an engineer out of MIT.
2
@pidayrocks2235 also, consider how the deaths are being overstated. In CO a man died with the virus but had a BAC level of 0.55% and was counted as a coronavirus death. CO was criticized to the point where they admitted that their deaths were overstated around 25%. And you saying "You can only base statistics off of the numbers you have available." Shows, and not to be rude, that you do not understand statistics. In statistics there are methods to account for numbers you do not have. In this case statisticians will admit that there is a good portion of people who are not tested. Also, antibody tests have suggested a larger portion of the population have been infected already.
2
@pidayrocks2235 it isn't that simple because, again, not everyone was tested. Also, most who died have underlying conditions and/or were old and thus near death to begin with. If you look at the number of deaths from the flu in the CDC they will give a number but a range of around 20 to 30 percent. That is huge. The reason why is because with around 70,000 deaths that is around 0.02% of the overall population. That is a small data set and thus the error bar will be large. In statistics it is known the the more data you get, simply by the math, the error bar is reduced. So now you have to look at the fact that those who are dying have underlying conditions and thus, as with the flu, you cannot say to what degree the virus caused in the death. And with no control it makes it even more difficult.
2
@pidayrocks2235 CDC have stats showing people died with the virus, with pneumonia and with both. From 2-21 until 5-16 there were, if I recall, around 71,000 died with the virus, around 83,000 died with pneumonia, and around 31,000 died with both. So consider that.
2
@pidayrocks2235 it isn't as simple as a confidence interval. Again, you have to consider that almost all who died were either old or sick to begin with, and thus close to death to begin with. Thus you cannot say to what degree the virus caused the death.
2
@pidayrocks2235 you are looking at the numbers wrong. It is numbers up to 5-16. They give numbers of the virus which is around 71,000, and then those of pneumonia , which is around 83,000, and then those of both. That means of the 71,000 who died with the virus, around 31,000 also had pneumonia. Not to be rude but this makes me question if you understand the numbers.
2
@pidayrocks2235 I agree, you cannot test the entire population which makes this issue more complex than what you are making it out to be. You cannot take the confirmed cases and the deaths and simply use those two number to come up with a mortality rate. The reason are 1. There are many who were not tested 2. Almost all who died were old and/or sick to begin with, thus you cannot say to what degree the virus played a role in the death 3. The overall data set is low. 100,000 deaths is around 0.02% of the overall population, that is small. On the last point, let us use a left wing talking point when they say X amount die every year due to lack of access to healthcare. When you look at those values they range from around 18,000, 30,000, 45,000, and even 60,000. That is a wide range. But as Prof. Katherine Baicker said, those individuals are in bad health to begin with. Thus, you cannot say if they die due to lack of healthcare access or due to being in bad health to begin with. The same applies to this virus. You cannot say that those who die was because of the virus or simply because they were in bad health to begin with.
2
@pidayrocks2235 no, that is not how the numbers work. The 31,000 was with both the virus and pneumonia. That means of the 71,000 who died with the virus, 31,000 also had pneumonia. Also, CDC numbers always lag.
2
@pidayrocks2235 that is not a good sample as that is a very small portion of the nation. And again, almost all were old and/or sick to begin with. So we cannot say to what degree the virus played a role in the death. Thus you cannot simply take 100,000 divided by the closed case and say that is the mortality rate. It is not that simple.
2
@KevinHoekman I agree. I am a numbers guy myself while pursuing a PhD in physical chemistry. The reality is that it isn't as simple as taking the deaths and dividing it by the closed cases. Basically this guy is saying that people dying with the virus is dying purely from the virus and nothing else. That is not how statistics work. In reality one needs to weigh out the numbers by determining to what degree the virus caused the death. That is something we had to do in one of my advanced stats course. For example, if the virus is listed as a comorbitiy, as in the number 3 reason for the cause of death, you could say it contributed, say 20%. Now I do not know and really no one does at this point, but that is how it should be done.
2
Michael, corporations do invest their money. They are not today due to having Obama for 8 years. Now we have a business friendly president they will invest knowing they have more freedom.
2
@kathrynwhite8482 1918 was a different time with less technology. The US life expectancy was around 40 years at that year. Sandwiched between them were 50 years. Now consider how our average life expectancy is around 78 years now. In AL around 80% who die were 65 and older. The fact is that this virus is deadly mainly to the old and/or sick. In NY of the people 44 and under they made up only 4% of the deaths where over 2/3 of them had underlying conditions and a good portion it was unclear. It was that of that group around 1/7 of them died with no underlying conditions. So, from NY data, that is 0.5% of someone under 44, with no clear health problems, dying from the virus. Now add in the fact that we have empty hospital beds, and we have the ability to protect our more vulnerable, we should be considering opening up and pushing for herd immunity. When you consider the spanish flu the mortality rate was high for those in the age range of 20-40 according to the CDC. Also, no antibodies were developed by the body to counter a second infection. This virus you do develop antibodies.
2
AOC is a racist
2
Permanent, as Michael said, means there is no expiration date. It can be changed. As for the expiring tax cuts on the middle class, Cruz brought it up in a debate with Sanders that the only reason why they did not do that is because democrats said they will filibuster the bill if they did. Sanders did not deny that. Even at that it is 10 years away. We will have a new president and a new congress by then. They can handle it at that point based on the state of the economy. .
2
True. We are at a point where we have to ask ourselves, what will cause more harm? This virus or the bad economy? I say re-open the economy within the next week. Even as it consumption will be low as many are unemployed and many others will still be scared.
2
Healthcare jobs will not be lost. We lack workers for healthcare in fact. We have too many jobs compared to the number of workers.
2
Short term vs long term gains.
2
M 0, an "assault weapon" is not define and can mean a lot. Something as small as a pistol grip can make a gun an "assault weapon". Many are pushing to ban the AR 15 when a Ruger mini 14 is essentially the same gun. As for bump stocks, the NRA has pushed to ban those, but they have been used in only one mass shooting.
2
@Dylan Murphy true. Ironic part, to prevent a second wave we need to open up and have more become infected.
2
@MERLE1593 , not really. More information is out and some research suggests this virus is not as deadly as was originally thought. Also, you have to consider what will be worse for the people, this virus or a bad economy? Suicide hotlines saw a spike in calls recently. Also consider that if we open the economy now many still won't interact as they are either unemployed or scared. Bars will still be empty, so will restaurants, night clubs, etc. But it is a start. Also, in 1918 technology was nowhere near what it is now.
2
Jeffrey Hagelin we are peaking. Over the past few days, at least in the US, we are seeing the flattening of the curve. Hospital beds are open and we have to actually cut back on medical staff as we now have too many. We are at the peak and showing signs of dropping nation wide. Maybe you should reassess your conclusion.
2
Jeffrey Hagelin which experts? And no, they are not saying that long. Those who are are foolish. You can't keep the economy shut down that long as more people will end up worse off due to the poor economy. A recent study out of Germany suggests the virus is not that deadly.
2
@601salsa the difference between this and HIV is that HIV is spread either through blood transfusion or sex, both which takes effort. This virus, like the cold, can unintentionally be spread. Also, there is no cure, vaccine or immunity to HIV. There is for this virus.
2
For profit healthcare has higher incentive to produce and advance in healthcare technology and techniques and also gives higher incentives to become a doctor. Healthcare just doesn't exist, someone has to provide it. The idea behind the for profit system is that it is the best way to provide the highest quality healthcare and best advancements in it.
2
Chris Pacheco no it doesn't as there is no consensus on this virus. More evidence is coming out that it is not that dangerous. The recovery rate keeps going up day after day but Fauci does nothing but fear monger to try to remain relevant.
2
@DG-nk7jo not true.
2
@juniebugg7675 at the beginning, in February, there were around 15 cases. You want to shut down an entire nation over that? Hindsight is 20/20. He did all he can do in his power, that is stop international travel and when he did he was called a racist.. The left has been all over the place with their double standards this year. First, they are blaming Trump for not doing enough to stop this virus, as if they wanted his personal help. But when it came to the riots and Trump offered to help, they said now. So what is it? Do they want his help or not? Trump did all he can do, let the states handle it. Around 1/3 of the deaths are in NJ and NY, democrat ran states. Democrat rate states have some of the highest death rates. During this entire time Trump remained calm and gave good news when it came. All Fauci did was fear monger and so many predictions wrong. In fact, I have got more correct than Fauci. But hey, if you are so smart, what should have Trump done?
2
@juniebugg7675 here is the thing, Trump comes in and forces shut downs early he will be called a fascist. He does all he can do in his power and he is blamed in not doing anything. At this point it is no win for him. This is why people stopped watching CNN and stopped listening to Fauci.
2
She is fighting for her people. More evidence is coming out that the virus is not that deadly. The virus is not going anywhere. During these warm weather we need to interact with the public and live life. We should always be doing things like washing our hands and so on. People are over exaggerating.
2
He wanted that position, so he got it. You don't think Trump has not received threats? If you can't stand the heat get out the kitchen.
2
We just had back to back days of less than 1000 deaths. We have not had that since near the end of March. New cases per day are dropping despite more testing. Deaths per day are dropping. The fact is that this pandemic is almost over. There is also evidence that more people than we think have an immunity to it either from COVID-19 and without knowing they got it, or another coronavirus. But CNN does not want the pandemic to end because one, they will have nothing to make Trump look bad and two, they will have to talk about the election and Biden.
2
DEAD VOTERS MATTER what?
2
Because one, does it help? CA has required it for weeks and still seen an increase in cases. And two, it is virtue signaling over a virus that is not that dangerous.
2
Boo hoo. Easy for teachers to act the way they do, they have a guaranteed paycheck.
2
Roc , those are not socialist nations. They are free market nations with high taxes on citizens. They have lower corporate tax rates and less regulations on businesses. They generate their tax revenue by essentially having a flat tax (compare to the US) on their citizens and a high consumption tax. Here, watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQwBA2QlJ3w&t=308s Bernie and the far left push to only tax the rich where those nations tax all their citizens high.
2
@mindremote , the US did not move to the right. As Ann Coulter said, we elect republicans to get rid of the department of education where we instead get NCLB. The US has been moving left for years. Also, FDR turned a recession into a depression. It was the war that made our nation strong.
2
@Darkannihilator1 , I didn't respond to the rest of your comment because I wanted to focus on one thing. I can comment if you want. But on happiness, you can't quantify. There is no way you can. It is similar to mental illness. Mental illness is so challenging because you can't quantify it, it is subjective. As someone who suffered through one I know this very well. It isn't like diabetes where you can measure blood sugar levels, it is subjective. One can be happy subjectively but objectively not be in the best position they can be. You can see that all across the US and this is a major problem on the left. People on the left may see someone who is not well educated, does not live in a great house, and they will say "I am trying to help them, they are poor", when in reality they are happy with their position. Saying other nations are "happy" is purely a culture thing and not a strong argument.
2
@sylviaking8866 , exactly. The problem with Bernie's plan is that he does want to take from those who work and give to those that don't. That is not the Nordic model. The Nordic mode taxes citizens more to pay for certain things. Citizens still have to work to pay for a home, food, car, etc. But as a result of high consumption taxes and essentially a flat tax compared to the US, their citizens are taxed more. That is something Bernie's fans don't understand.
2
OnceAndFutureKing, the "right to life" means government cannot take life away without due process. Just like your right to bear arms does not guaranteed you a gun, it just means you have a right to possess a gun and that right cannot be taken away without due process. Your "right to life" does not guarantee it.
2
enhaxed X, you made a claim with zero justification. I take that as a victory for me.
2
@TheSashapooch I attended the funeral of a 5 year old guy who died in a car accident.By your logic I should push to ban driving.
2
"Sanders is advocating for polices that already exist in my home country of Australia." Like high oil productivity? Oh, wait, Bernie hates fossil fuels.
2
Trump is going to win. Fauci has done nothing but fear monger where other experts have are more settle, and optimistic approach. Fauci just fear mongers and gives no positive news. He is just trying to remain relevant.
2

Previous
2
Next
...
All