Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "The Jimmy Dore Show" channel.

  1. Gravel's campaign has 30,000 unique donors and has time till early June (see tweet from May 6th, ActBlue remove the count) - so they could do with some viral momentum
    4
  2. please share the info, as little as 1 USD is ENOUGH, and people can contribute a LOT by SHARING on Social media. I find the argument convincing that he would be helpful (read: an attack dog) for the genuine We The People candidates because he does not have to hold back (so no quarrels between Sanders, Gabbard, Warren fans, Yang should be safe from his bite as well). I find the announcement video well done it includes scenes of the 2008 debates
    4
  3. Democracy could be so nice without the voters !
    4
  4.  @1250Gator  Do you rightwinters ever THINK before you make a comment or have ANY INFORMATION (for instance about how Medicare works or single payer in other nations). or are you just a troll ?
    4
  5.  @EnsoEntanglements  in a single payer nation the public option (opting out) would slowly undermine the system, add costs, red tape, maybe dysfunction, unfairness. In the U.S. the predators have their systems to screw the insured (and companies ! they purge companies now !) in place, they will purge the pools, will only insure the young and healthy (at seemingly reasonable rates - not when you consider the cherrypicked pool). It is not only philosophical. In the U.S. (with the toxic culture) the public option would set up the reform for failure. Tulsi either did not do her homework and does not understand WHY and HOW single payer nations do it (and at half the costs) - which makes it of course easy for lobbyists to come up with seemingly harmless tweaks to medicare for All. I will give her and Yang the benefit of the doubt - but there are other players who clearly shill for the industry. Sanders is the only one who GETS IT. (btw I live in a single payer country. Got sucked into the discussion. I always knew the system was better (fairer) but I was stunned that it cost so much less (roughly half - 54 % of spending in Austria but with an older population). That got me thinking - obviously ALL rules of the free market, competition etc. were NOT followed - and obviously that worked much better. So I reverse engineered what seems to be the ingredients of a cost-efficient system. No large for profit players. the less for-profit the better (the NHS in U.K. does it best - not even the doctor practices. usually they are small players that are independent and for-profit (the revneue pays for the practice, the surplus is the wage of the doctor so to spaek). The NHS also runs the hospitals. In most countries they are non-profits but run by states, cities and some by churches. Mandatory ! contribution for all that have a job and their employer (percentage of wage, often with a cap). But keep it very affordable. The rest comes from general tax revenue. No opting out. No duplicative coverage. Those 2 rules ensure that the affluent will use the same system as the other people. No 2 class medical system. (which a public option would promote especially with cuts to funding) Comprehensive coverage (incl. dental !) Restricting advertising and marketing for everything related to healthcare (that way media can be on the right side if there is an issue - they are not going to lose ad revenue, they never had any to begin with). If there are private doctors (real capacities in their field, specialities like accupuncture, sports medicine, ...) they have to be good, they get patients by word of mouth. Have a mechanism of quotas. for doctor practices and pharmacies. Every region gets a certain number of slots for doctors. (family doctors, specialists). if the agency hires the doctors the case is clear, they determine where they will work and how many. if the doctor practices are independent they will tend flock to the attractive regions (cities, touristic regions). The agency has a say how many set up shop in a certain region / or per 1000 residents (enough but not too many). So the more remote or rural regions will also find candidates - doctors need the contract with the agency to have enough patients, so they will be more willing to consider the less glamorous destinations if there is an opening.
    4
  6. + Shan Ri Ha I second Kurt.Dk-55 - when Sanders is interviewed and asked about Russia he comments shortly on it ("needs to be investigated, our elections need to be safe, bla bla " ) and then moves on. And whatever the topic of the interview - he always always mentions Medicare for All, and on a regular basis the student debt situation, income inequality, no maternity leave, infrastructure program, climate change,... Healthcare is ALWAYS thrown out, the other issues he varies a little bit. Broken record - good marketing technique - lol. He is changing public opinion and public discourse one interview and one rally / speech at a time. I do not know if he believes the "Russia hacked the DNC ... " story * or if he just pays lip service to get them out of his hair (lol ) so he can move on in the short time given in such interviews to what he thinks is important. Maybe it is just: Choose your battles (and discussions) wisely. * Please note how the media and also the crazy Dems changed the framing: it went from "Russia hacked the DNC" soon to "Russia interfered with our elections" and recently it became "Russia undermines our democracy" (as if the U.S. oligarchs and politicians needed help with that). One thing is sure - Sander definitely does not fuel the Russia Mania - well he has not lost an election in a pathetic manner against ! Trump ! so he does not need to deflect. He COULD raise money (the DNC is in trouble in that respect). He could fill stadions again - and they all know it.
    4
  7. People hoarded toilet paper (which IS produced IN the U.S.) - there is some value in using masks when people meet each other, but the healthcare and essential workers come first. - It is unfortunate, they should have immediately recommended DIY (fabric) masks, even wearing a shawl over your mouth and nose has some value. But that is not up to scientific standards, so the scientists have a hard time to recommend a "good enough as provisory" equipment. In a well run country, the masks and PPE would have been on stock, the U.S. had the advantage of having the warning example of China and the U.S.  - if Fauci had his way, it would have been like that. Plus a plan ready to go how to FORCE suited companies in the U.S. to produce the stuff. Or a collaboration with other companies in other countries. costs more than producing them in regular times in China, but that is a problem that can be solved with MONEY.
    4
  8. Fed St. Louis survey in 2019: 40 % of the participants couldn't come up with the money in a 400 USD emergency (they would have to borrow). in the allegedly "booming" economy. High employment rates mean shit when the people are extorted for healthcare, rent, childcare. And wages are not good either. They hadn't risen with inflation rate. Sure 15 USD in Seattle sound good - untill you get into the rent situation. In some areas rent is less - but still high compared to the wage levels for the available ! jobs THERE.
    4
  9. What you may have in mind is a debt jubilee (I think Steve Keen spoke about it). Can you imagine the shitstrom following such a suggestion - by economic "experts", speakers of think tanks, corporate media and clueless bought and paid for politicians. Never mind those who exactely understand the concept. - The plebs MUST NOT UNDERSTAND MONEY. DEBT. MONEY CREATION. See my comment outside this thread. MMT is not harmless - it is completely subversive in good way. It would shake the foundation of power. And as a side effect would undermine the argumentation for the "business model" of Big Finance (mainly speculation). Given the last reports on Global Warming - MMT is what could save us in the 11th hour (Debt forgiveness of private debt which was your issue - is one aspect of MMT). The argument is always: This and that is _too expensive. OR: How are we going to pay for it - of course ONLY for things that benefit the citizens, peace or the environment. In essence: it is about money and funding. Or purports to be. No one EVER asks that questions when it comes to insane spending for military, surveillance, the letter agencies. The war in Iraq did not concern the deficit hawks. (Dr. Kelton coined the phrase deficit owl - sees in the dark, has 180 degree vision range, is a symbol of wisdom). The health care costs of fracking will have to be born by the citizens, lower life expectancy, illnesses, loss of quality of life, reduced proptery value and medical costs. How can we afford that ?? WE cannot afford it - but it does not hit the investors and rich people or the media mouthpieces, so they do not care.
    4
  10. If HRC only was a well intentioned technocrat. Maybe not charismatic but no nonsense, knowing the game, the people. She would have won, maybe not in a landslide, but a win. And then she could serve. Fact 1) she SERVES the donors, and the privileged. Fact 2) she serves her own vanity and her ego seems to demand that she presents herself as this noble, competent, selfless person Fact is: Sanders is actually serving the people. - He "had to" concede, picked himself up, worked for the campaign (they did not make much use of him - afraid he would continue to steal her thunder, even if he did not meant to). After the election: touring the country, giving interviews ALWAYS mentioning the ISSUES.
    4
  11. +Jones "shareholder" provide NO value - they provide money (and when you start out with money which you can invest which yields more profits ... the gap is opening and widening). - Money is a legal and social agreement, it SHOULD facilitate the exchange of goods and services. It is created "out of thin" air - FIAT money, every time banks give out loans. So it is not hard to come by - even though the media, banks and politics are deceptive about the concept. And it is outright taboo to mention that governments can directly created debt free, interest free money. That is - if that is politically desired. It was not hard to create trillions of USD in QE - and the U.S., UK. and EU did it - all to prop up a dysfunctional, criminal system (and mind you QE came AFTER the bailouts).
    4
  12. I did not like that Sanders did not endorse Tim Canova - I got why he played nice then, it got him the position of outreach and that meant a lot of interviews. Which Sanders put to good use, so from a strategy standpoint that was O.K. (I did not like it, but it was in the range of normal compromise).
    4
  13. + Keith Durant part 2 of 3 The industrialist financing the Nazis from the 1920s on (because they were hostile towards the left and the unions, don't be fooled by the "Socialist" in the name NationalSocialist) KNEW that Hitler planned to go to war.  But he/they did NOT TELL that the masses. They talked about jobs, security, family values, restoring order and stability - and the minorities chosen as scapegoats as projection target for the anger. They never talked about the role of the very rich industrialists who COULD have done something for the masses (FDR in 1933 FORCED the wealthy and rich to help out their fellow citizens with higher taxes). Not in Germany. I know from an old distant relative that her parents were very careful not to say any critical about the regime once the dictatorship was installed. (The parents did not condone of the Nazis, they were regular farmers, simple folks without the privilege of eductation or having seen a lot of the world, but with the right instincts. They were no political activists of course, they were farmers. Likely coming from a Conservative and Catholic standpoint - and they just did not like the Nazis or expect good things from them). But the kids could have blurted something out, so they very carefully avoided anything that could get them into trouble with the local authorities loyal to the dictatorship - and there were enough people around who were enthused about the new regime. And it was an opportunity to settle old scores (that had nothing to do with poltics) for some as well. That farmer already had served in WW1 and was too old to be drafted (and farmers were important for maintaining food supply so they were not the first to be drafted). He had a radio and used it in later years also to hear "enemy radio" to learn what was really going on on the front. That was dangerous. I assume the radios they sold, had the stations fixed according to the area where you used the radio, so that you could hear only the allowed and legal radio stations (all Nazi controlled of course). If you were caught to have manipulated the radio, if you were caught to listen to the "enemy" you were in trouble. There was a snitch (a relative of the familiy ! ) who alerted the local authorites, but in the little city people knew each other. The farmer got a warning in advance from another insider that "they were coming for him" so he could either restore the allowed state of his radio or hide the radio alltogether. And the Nazis did not remove weill integrated members of those close knit communities without evidence - not when they did not belong to one of the officially prosecuted minorities (like Jewish people, or Communists, or Roma). No one that belonged to the majority. It would have been too unsettling and given the relative harmlessness of the farmer in that rural area it was not worth the trouble. That showed when the Nazis later started to go after mentally ill or retarded people. In some close-knit communities they got backlash, even the mayors would resist the official orders (and the mayors always were membes of the NAZI party). Usually they then left these communities alone and went after easier targets. Meaning of course: the Nazis might have been surprised HOW EASY it was to go after the Jewish people, and they went from bad to worse. With a large ! public ORGANIZED and unified display of solidarity for minorities in 1932 - 1934 the Nazis might have decided that it was not worth the trouble and the frustration in the population to strip the Jewish people off their citizens rights. The Nazis played the Divide and Conquer game really well. - I read of a story of an elderly couple in Hamburg who were caught listening to the enemy on the radio - both were put into concentration camps. The woman was released after a few months, but her husband died in the camp.
    4
  14. Let's hope this all means that Sanders is smartly preparing his DEMEXIT. Maybe the Democrats need just MORE ROPE with which to HANG THEMSELVES. Give them some more opportunities to sell out, they should find plenty they want to continue to serve the donors. And Sanders calling them out on it in a polite way. O.K. they had 4 months since the Great Debacle. At some point the Dems could earn themselves so many bad points that it will be easier to "justify" the split. After all he tried everything and remained polite. The Dems and bitter Hillary fans would of course try to smear him (traitor, splitting the vote etc.) - but he should make the task as hard as possible for them. IF they rely on him for some time and push him forward as the nice facade for their neoliberal game they will have a hard time discrediting him afterwards. If they wanted him to speak FOR them for some time, how wrong can he be ? Or how wrong were they to work with him ? And of course he is now on Televions on a regular basis - will be hard for MSM to completely sweep him under the rug, if/when he breaks free. The Republicans swore that they would repeal Obamacare. Now this election handed them enough rope to hang themselves. Before they "could not do anything about it, the Dems forced it on us". I am being forcefully optimistic here - Anyway a grassroots movement should not rely on one leader. The advantage: he/she can galvanize the movement and give it focus and direction. The disadvantage: one person can resign, can be assassinated, blackmailed or sell out. After the death of Dr. King the movement deflated somewhat. On the surface there were successes - enough to the pacify the masses and to take the energy out of the machine. MLK could have kept it going or revive it. The African Americans had gotten something, the progressives in the north could pat themselves on the shoulder. When he was shot, MLK intended to have a War on Poverty, he wanted to unite POOR people no matter the ethnicity so they could better their lot. He became really dangerous. And he was right on Vietnam (which had cost him support at that time, but people would have realized later that he was ahead in the curve and also that he again was principled - what one would want of a head of state). A presidential candidate King a few years later would have been hard to beat. They had to take him out.
    3
  15. Sister Agnes makes a similar point (on a former alleged chemical weapons attacks). She said she heard from members of her parish that dead people - likely Christians - were brought into the mosque and presented to the U.N. investigators in the following days as "vicitims" of a government attack. These people likely were killed by the rebels and used as props to frame the government..
    3
  16. + Christine Joyce I am always baffled when in the UK healthcare discussion the flaws and the need to "improve" the system is discussed. The costs are USD 3.900 vs. 5.000 - 5.500 per person for the majority of the other WEALTHY European countries + Canada (my country Austria has 5.400, Germany 5.600 approx.) the US has for instance 9.000 (all hail the private system), Australia 6.000  (per capita healthcare expenditure World Bank 2014 *). also see my comment above. Maybe it is time to tell everyone you come across about that fact, it does not seem commonly known. And a little more funding could do wonders to have the system function like a charm. My country has good healthcare, no problem with waiting lists (there are rumours about hip replacements but nothing too bad). Well we paid on average USD 5.400 for every citizen for that in 2014. It is true that as percentage of GDP the UK costs are a higher portion than in other rich countries (see the same website * , scroll down). That does not mean the costs per capita (= per person) are too high - the only advanced nation to beat you is Japan - it rather means the UK GDP is too low. Now that too low GDP could be fixed with higher wages, higher taxes to fund infrastructure investments or social housing.
    3
  17. One must imagine the intellectual bravery - or foolishness of going against the points Noam Chomsky is making. P.S: Saw a vid of NC and Harry Belafonte, 20 year celebration of Democracy Now. Belafonte needs a walking stick but sharp as ever. I am trying an Irish style blessing here: May their 120 year of age be at least as good as their 90s. May they have a large and grass rooting audience willing to be educated, may they continue to annoy the heck out of the warmongerers and establishment shills and partisan ideologues.
    3
  18. More information on "creation of money out of nothing" can be found on positivemoney dot org. Bank of England article "Money Creation in the Modern Economy" Quartely Bulletin Jan. 2014 is also very enlightening and takes less time than the positivemoney vids (although I recommend watching them als well). One cannot simply solve problems by throwing money at them but without money most problems cannot be solved. I honestly think it is one of the most important topics of our time.
    3
  19. The crowd was shocked - and very reliefed that Belafonte offered them something to laugh at the very end. Then HRC could laugh, too. Glossing over the embarrassment he made them endure for a short moment.
    3
  20. In any plutocracy you need a mechanism to contain the Left. Otherwise that plutocracy aint gonna last very long. The Democratic Party is the mechanism of containing the Left. Their chief purpose is not to win elections (like the Republican party), it is to PREVENT PROGESSIVES from winning elections.
    3
  21. They own a row house in D.C. - which makes sense because he is in Congress since 1991 and in Senate since 2007. A lot of rent savend ;) Also one would assume that being mayor and then representative would explain how to finance a family home in Burlington and a row house in D.C. Plus the vacation house they bought last summer with Jane's inheritance. And I assume the books are selling well.
    3
  22. a considerable part of that oil is meant for export not for consumption in the US. They leave out that little bit of info .
    3
  23. Damn Ruskies - we U.S. representatives undermine our democracy on our own.
    3
  24. +EJ - please read my comment below - the conflict in Yu likely could have been solved diplomatically - the NATO bombing (killing many Serbian civilians) promoted the escalation - and I think it was either reckless or intentional.
    3
  25. globalresearch.ca has good reporting on this (and former alleged government use of poison gas). Sister Agnes also published a report how the videos for the alleged attack in August 2013 were stages (like little dead children being used as "props" in propaganda videos).
    3
  26. Ideology easily trumps intelligence, experience and education. - There is no fool like an educated fool. - Problem: they USE their intelligence and often eloquence to DEFEND the ideology - and they can be quite convincing. And since they are extra emotionally invevsting in getting "insight" right it is very hard to convince them - facts do not matter any more than for the most ardent and bigotted Trump supporter. They are just better in hiding and "arguing" their bias.
    3
  27. Because the American Capitalistic System (and that includes the Military Industria Complex) profited from undermining the countries of Middle and Latin America (History: US interventions there since 1900). Now: War on drugs. Regime change in Honduras (HRC and Obama approved, Honduras is a neoliberal hell hole). Weapons exports (manufactured in US by for profit corporations *) to Mexico and other very unstable countries where organized crime and corruption is rampant. Trade deals like NAFTA: Destroying good paying jobs in the US, creating some halfway decent paid jobs (for Mexican standards) in the same industries in Mexico. At the same time allowing imports into the country that destroy the little farms. And these farmers were poor to begin with. Surprise, surprise now many try to come to the US, others stream into the cities in Mexico but there are not enough jobs. Surprise, surprise crime is flourishing. NAFTA was bad for most of the American workers and it was VERY BAD for most of the Mexican citizens. The ruling classes in the US, in Canada and in Mexico conspired to screw the majoritiy of citizens in all three countries. * The joke is that the weapons, military and surveillance industry in the US cannot outsource because of national security interests. These jobs are also spread out all over the country so that EVERY representative must have an interest to keep that con going on because stoping it would threaten the livelyhood of his constituency. (Of course new jobs COULD be created for these folks but that is not going to happen.) Loss of jobs is USED AS ARGUMENT. Can't stop to supply weapons to dictatorships we need the jobs. Of course there are hidden costs like unwanted immigration. Or terrorism and the mass surveillance that is caused or at least justified by it. Surveillance became a very profitable business niche so do not expect that to stop anytime soon, the constitution be damned. The people profiting of this industry have no interest in ending terrorism and there are indications that the US indeed made a very half hearted attempt (to put it mildly) to stop ISIS and they let Turkey and Saudi Arabia get away with supporting ISIS to some degree. Do not think it has anything to do with whoever is playing the front puppet in the White House - currently Obama - this is systemic -Eisenhower warned in the 1950s of the Military Industrial Complex. One of the reasons the US is so pissed of at Russia. Not only were the US STILL not able to remove the government in Syria of which they do not approve - and that is a rare event - no, the Russians also showed how to effectively damage ISIS if you mean business.
    3
  28. Yes and more and more Europeans are waking up to the fact and are not at all happy about the sanctions. Our spineless politicians: when the US says jump, they are: "How high?" German comedy show on publicly financed TV showed in detail the embedded German print media (the large newspapers are all courted by and cosy with the "Atlantic Bridge". The public TV station got sued by the editor and owner of one newspaper they made fun of. That lawsuit was not successful, that was all the promotion the video (it is still on youtube) needed. You do not sue a TV show that (on a regular basis) gets 1 million views (in a country with 80 million people) when they - correctly - show your ties to a foreign nation. All the leading print media are treating us to the usual (NATO) talking points, Putin baaaaaad and DANGEROUS, USA interventions for "democracy" are reported as matter of facts, no critical word to be heard. In comedy, on the web, in TV talk shows and in the commentary section of leading newspapers we get the other side of the story. If I am in conspirational mood ;) I think in some cases the NSA might have valuable files on a lot of influencal politicians. Anyway, while Poland and the Baltic States are much more sensitiveon the topic of Russia, that does not mean they are correct in fearing an invasion. The austerity policy in Europe did a lot of damage especially in the former Warsaw Pact countries who were not very wealthy to begin with. Before the financial crash they enjoyed the influence of neoliberal economic policies. Unlike the now wealthy states like Germany, Netherlands, France ....) who built their countries and economies under much more regulated and "sheltered" conditions after WW2. When the economy is bad, people tend to elect fringe or more polarizing parties, often right wing and nationalistic. Poland has a very right wing government and the right wingers are also strong in the Baltic States. Of course those politicians have an interest to promote nationalism and fear against Russia while privatizing health care, going after journalists and shredding welfare and pensions right before the eyes of the people. If you have problems domestically look for a target for deflection: jews, gypsies, immigrants, or a big, bad foreign enemy. There is old ressentment against the Soviet Union of course. These nations have suffered so the right wingers do not need to stray far to find a good enemy. This is all nonsense of course - Putin - whatever you think of thim - is certinaly not stupid, nor is he impulsive. He worked for the KGB. So strategic thinking should be in his tool box and he acts like it. Why would he invade Poland or the Baltic States, Finland or Norway. They are members of the EU. The important EU members UK (still), France and Germany are also very relyable NATO members Russia wants to continue to sell gas and fossil fuel to Europe. Our corporations and farmers want to start selling to the Russians again.
    3
  29.  BLAIR M Schirmer  The Hill made an interesting point. The representatives return home after 4 work days in D.C. - that is quite a journey if home is Hawaii, and it gets exhausting. So the representatives of Hawaii may change quicker than in other states. After some time the people holding office seek for a more practical job.
    3
  30.  @MoCa5545  In Austria and Germany the death rate is 3,9 - 4 %. Confirmed infection cases (tested positive for coronavirus) versus deaths caused by it ** ** in Austria confirmed by a doctor - the number of "died WITH positive test result" is only 0,1 % lower. Theoretically a person could have tested positive and then died of something unrelated like a hear attack, or the connection is not clear, such cases stem more from the beginning, then they seem to have examined all deaths. Good healthcare systems, mandatory sick leave, services (and testing) free at the point of service (= single payer). Both countries have the same kind of healthcare systems, standard of living. lockdown mid of March - the death rate per 100,000 residents (this is another number, my first paragraphe was about dead among the infected) is higher in Germany than in Austria. That could have to do with number of cases, who got it. In Austria it started with a cluster in skiing regions. So younger and healthy people for the most part. if they got it into care homes in the very early stages (before they took action and did the shutdown) that could account for the higher death rate in Germany).
    3
  31.  @MoCa5545  Both countries do much better than the U.S. or Sweden or U.K. I checked out the Swedish curve yesterday (deaths per 100,000 for several countries) - With luck that curve starts flattening NOW (it is inconclusive, could as well be that they are not there yet). Their handling cost the lives of many elderly people. In the U.K. the elderly in underfunded care homes in combination with crowded housing, underpaid staff lead to the worst outcomes in any rich country (death per 100,000). Sweden could protect its older citizen somewhat better because they have many people living single, and their care homes are better funded. U.K. in the beginning tried the Swedish approach (which does not work well anyway) - and U.K. does not have a lot of the advantages Sweden has. They let it get out of hand, and it circulated in CARE HOMES for the eledery. Low income people, I am sure the private homes for the posh people fared better.
    3
  32. ​ @MoCa5545  In Germany, Austria, .... - or Sweden - citizens have no reason to NOT get tested, or staying home or seeking medical help if they are unclear about symptoms. There is a good chance their corona virus infections with at least some symptoms will be detected - even if their symptoms are not too bad and patients can recover at home. Only very mild cases or asymptomatic cases will remain undetected. Following up on the infection chain of a cluster also reveals the mildest cases. They don't do random testing in Germany or Austria (although there are a few trials now in touristic areas in Austria - to boost confidence of potential tourists, that the hotels, and B & B's and restaurants are constantly tested. The restaurants are already open, touristic attractions are open or soon will be - and hotels will follow till mid June 2020). As for how many undetected cases there are (under conditions of partial lockdown and a lot of precautions) They do more widespread testing if they find a cluster The capital of Austria, Vienna did testing of persons that work in home care etc. They found a cluster, and by following the chain of infection with a lot of testing found 150 people that tested positive. It started with temps working for 2 large postal sorting center in 2 states, the temps were the links between the centers. Temps and regular staff got infected, 1 staff member was married to a teacher, another one to a childcare worker ... there you go. They found that it spread a lot via families. And temps that were refugees and lived in homes (cramped conditions, more interactions in kitchen etc). To find those 150 they tested approx. 3,000 people (and the city of Vieann 3,000 more) They quarantined (a lot of) the staff of the postal centers and for 2 weeks used soldiers to help out. During that mass testing they found 1 or 2 asymptomatic carriers (one of them a teacher or a mum infected by a teacher, I forgot). If asymptomatic carriers also happen to be good spreaders (how much droplets or aerosols they produce) and / or happen to interact with a lot of people that could be enough to start a new wave. So authorities have to be aware of the dangers of mild or asymptomatic cases BUT these cases seem to be RARE - at least in the current setting (children who could be good asymptomatic spreaders had not returned to school for the most part, and the economy had not fully reopened). And of course all these tested persons (mid to end of May) now show up in the statistics. Despite all the precautions (and the attention that cluster got) - 2 soldiers that helped out, then also ended up testing positive. That damn virus is very contagious. The cluster in the postal center triggered even more preventive testing in Vienna (capital) they also tested people that work in care homes in childcare, the inhabitants in care homes etc. So in a setting where the older teenagers had just returned to school, and the cases had gone down considerably, and retail had recently reopened - they did not even find a handful of asymptomatic cases. "mild" cases that could pass for a cold - if there is a substantial number of them after fully reopening - are the more likely cases of going unnoticed, not the asymptomatic infected persons. IF very mild undetected cases do happen in larger numbers (when the economy is reopened and the kids are in school) that is not necessarily good news. If the death rate would be 10 or 50 times lower than we know from our current official statistics and scientific knowledge (what we know for sure) - then Yes. But mortality rate being drastically lower is not at all ! supported by what we have seen in New York and Italy, France, Spain or even worse U.K. Somewhat lower mortality rate is easily undone by the virus spreading so easily and exploding ! case numbers (Spreading fast, if not caught early on). The mortality rate (according to our current knowledge based on reported infections) is either somewhat realistic OR the virus is much more contagious if we have a lot of unreported cases. Either way: Not. Good. The only good scenario: another mutation pops up, it is more contagious (that is what happened in early March 2020, most people that got infected globally, caught the new mutation), AND it is also much more harmless (death complications) AND it would give immunity (at least some) against the existing strains. Then we could dare to let that spread (would take some time to find out how harmless it really is) and we could get herd immunity with little sacrifices. We could even - after some research - intentionally infect healthy and young persons with such a strain (please note that CoVid-19 continues to surprise doctors with complications. Inflammation in children, organs damaged - not only lungs. Blood clots in young persons, ...) Vaccination is the artificial version of that scenario. But it is not likely at all that the stars align that way with upcoming mutations (they will come). Any new mutation will have to be equally or more contgious than the current one to prevail. (A "good" strain could be mass applied by humans - but first you would need to find it and then have mass experiences how much damage it really does). Any new mutation could also get more deadly, or causing more lasting healthcare damage or causing the need for ICU and hospital treatments. MERS (another form of corona virus) popped up in 2012 or 2013. On the Arabic penninsula. Mortality rate in the range of 30 %. We are just lucky - it is not very contagious - so far " The individuals that get infected (it went from bats to dromedars and then to humans) are unlucky, but for the authorities that scenario is much better. With proper hygiene and precautions (that must not be extreme) spreading can be stopped.   Boris Johnson did not want at all to have the shutdown, nor did the governments of Germany, Austria, France, Italy, ... want to do it. They all dragged their feet, but most at some point resigned themselves to the inevitable and jumped into action. U.K. government was longer in denial. There were some precautions in the U.K. (no large gatherings, like concerts, or sports events and pushing for handwashing and disinfection). We have PROOF (in the U.K. numbers) that these precautions that would hardly impact the economy, were not nearly enough - so your theory about "low death rates" does not play out. Not to forget COMPLICATION RATES. The infection is deadly enough, and causing too many hospital and ICU stays - considering how easily it is spread, and what the case numbers could be w/o severe precautions and restrictions. Look where the U.K. is even now: Highest death rate (per 100,000 residents) of any nation for which we have (at least somewhat) reliable numbers (we do not really know what is going on in Brazil and even less so in Iran, or the poor African countries). And STILL the U.K. curve (deaths) is not flattening. The Swedish curve might be at the beginning of a flattening (at high level) - that is inconclusive - but UK death numbers are still going up straight. Prime Minister Boris Johnson was cavalier in March in order to justify how his government handled the crisis differently than almost all other weatlhy nations - in order to reinforce the message: It isn't that bad. And promptly got himself infected. But of course he had doctors hovering over him, and recoverd. The people providing services (cooking, cleaning, adminstrative) and those who interact with the Prime Minister naturally are very carefully monitored (also health status). But he shook hands with voters to prove his point - and that backfired.
    3
  33.  @MoCa5545  if the death rate is lower than it appears to be because there are more mild (unreported) cases that means it is much more contagious. More contagious can easily more than compensate for the lower mortality rate. IF you let the infection run its course, it will spread like a wildfire. The Spanish Flu did have a low mortality rate but was fairly contagious. (corona virus might be worse in both respects - it is hard to say data of 1918 is not comparable to data today, and the response in 1918 / 1919 and in 2020 was so different. 50 million people died of the pandemic after WW1, if I remember correctly. That CoVid-19 is not quite as deadly as we assume (crunching the numbers with the indentified cases, under partial lockdown conditions !) is of little help. It is a numbers game, if you have MASSES infected - sure most of them will recover, even at home. BUT: We already KNOW that CoVid-19 leads to MORE hospital stays than the flu, and - important also to more complications that require the hospital or even ICU Cynically said: with the flu fewer people (as percentage) land in the hospital and the flu also does not lead to so many cases that need the ICU for 1 - 5 weeks. With the flu most people are either dead after one week (if they die at all), or on the way of getting better. With corona after one week trouble can just start, if the virus goes deeper into your lungs. People started to feel better after 1 week - and then they got much worse, to the degree that they needed to present to a hospital.
    3
  34.  @MoCa5545  We did have a flu PANDEMIC in 2009, many people died, and hospitals were very busy - but not overwhelmed. No first world country had to practice triage (the doctors in Italy got the official instructions by the authorities - the richest region in Italy !! had the hospitals that were 2 - 3 days away from applying those rules about who would be abandoned / left to die and who would get intense care). ** Estimates are that globally between 700 million and 1,4 billion people were infected with flu in 2009. The overwhelming majority of patients recovered at home, but with such a high number of infected persons you have a certain number of people needing the hospital. And many additional deaths despite the low mortality rate (0,1 % of cases). These deaths were complacently accepted - by the population, by the governments. For the most part it hit the elderly. Corona virus is more infectious than the 2009 flu, it causes MORE complications, and many more hospital stays and ICU treaments. That is why in 2009 no shutdown, travel restrictions were even discussed (they could have done that for 2 weeks and masks and handwashing campaigns on top. That could have made a difference, with little damage to the economy). But not even that was considered. CoVid-19 is another beast. ** Italy may have never officially applied triage, but they were 2 - 3 days away from it becoming official policy in any hospital that had many cases - the affluent North was hit the worst. People over 80 years would not get intensive care (did not matter if they had CoVid-19 complications or something else, or persons with underlying conditions). Inofficially that may have played out already. Plus: they had a higher death rate, because they could not provide the best possible care, many doctors and nurses were infected too, they were just too overwhelmed. Germany and Austria later took in patients (with CoVid-19) from Italy (Germany also from France). But at the time when Italy would have needed help the most, they didn't get it from the neighbour states. I think the governments did not dare to offer the ICU beds - they were shocked about what was going on in Italy, and wanted to keep their reserves. When it turned out they could contain the spread with the lockdowns well enough and the hospitals were never at breaking point (because they were catching corona later as a nation than unfortunate Italy) they did offer help. Italy also got doctors from Cuba.
    3
  35. He is not the "inventor", he did some relevant work in the early stage in 1989 and 1990 * - and people did work before and a LOT of research AFTER him. The Hungarian doctor Dr. Katalin Kariko, now co founder of BionTech (that partnered with Pfizer) found a way to deal with inflammation and to use it for humans. She had continued her work for many, many years, while he did not publish on the issue anymore. He injected it with lipids into mice, and that worked (well they did not die as other animals before them), so that gave hope mRNA technology could work for humans in the future. He contributed a part of the puzzle, Kariko does not style herself the inventor of the technology only that she cracked an important part after working loooong on it. He also called himself her "mentor" and "coach" in a email, she does not share that impression. They met once in person when he asked her to hold a speech. I hink he is desperate to become more relevant. Kariko has gotten a lot of attention since the vaccine has been approved, and with good reason. Sounds like he is pissed that he abandoned that area of research, she might get the Nobel Prize for it - and his contribution is too miniscule to put him on the list. There are many others that contributed MORE. He does the tour on the usual outlets (anti vaxxers, incl. Steve Bannon) and let's himself be introduced as "inventor" - which shows that he lacks academic honesty, and he would not get away with it in the world of academia and of course not on any serious outlets. And Steve Bannon - really ? Research often is a compound effort, he deserves to be mentioned (and his paper will be cited) - along with many, many others. And Dr. Kariko deserves more recognition because she continued with the work for many years and finally had a breakthrough, that helped to get funding and lead to them being ready to develop a vaccine (for which they got plenty of German funding btw). in the 1990s she had her funding cut and she continued to do the work in her free time (after she also had to swithc to another university, at least she could use the lab). I think she had the first promising results end of the 1990s.
    3
  36. +racewiththefalcons excellent point. - the Dems could have done a big press conference in summer - all together. How they are all for MedicareForAll now. Vote us in, and we will make it happen. The bill is ready, we mean business. - healtchare is an issue in the races tells us CNN, they talk about ACA, the bureaucratic expensive monster. 3 persons carefully avoiding to mention MfA or Sanders - of course not. The advertiser do not like it. And the advertisers are also the donors, to the parties that spend a lot on TV ads .... They played a clip of a GOP and a Democrat debating- two females, I forgot the state. The GOP voted to abolish the protection of preexisting conditions. Well that is bad enough (maybe the Dem or the panel mentioned the public option - I am not quite sure - would be revolutionary in that setting). MfA polls 51 % with Republicans, plus 80 % with Democratic voters. The Dems could have a landslide. Improve chances to win the Senate back. People would like to vote for them IF they would be perceived as fighting for the issues that matter. Well they aren't, the donors like ACA. It protects their profits - the U.S. pays 55 - 65 % of the costs of other wealthy countries. Literally ! see World bank per capita healthcare expenditures of nations. U.S. USD 9,200 Europe 5,000 - 6000 - Germany for instance 5,600. Austria 5,400 (both wealthy nations, 85 resp. 8 million people, they developed their own systems after WW2, their population is on average older than the U.S. so the U.S. should beat them on that alone). Tiny Iceland with 300,000 people is in that range of 5 - 6k as well,. You bet they (their public non-profit insurance agency on their behalf) pay for instance much, much less than the U.S. citizens for medical drugs (U.S. has 325 million people). Iceland could pool the purchasing of drugs and medical devices with other nations - or threaten to do so. They can also find out (if only in backroom talks and exchanges of data bases what European nations with 3 or 85 million people are paying. No doubt Big Pharma would rip them off - if they could).
    3
  37.  @pinkkat3631  WE understand they should KNOW whose house they raid (mafia, meth lab, or a suburban couple and she is accused of some date related spat with the government). We also understand this was not professional or proportionate. He shouted at her husband To COME DOWN NOW. Mind you the husband is not covered by the warrant, has no criminal history and is in his own house.
    3
  38. They don't do that for "America" - just for a few on the top of the food chain. The U.S. citzens (at least half of them) are in slow decline while the Afghans have to endure endless misery, war, death, destruction. And are cheated out of the resoures that could help rebuild the country - and they does not Trump could skip the war part and go directly to rebuilding. (Which is not easy because Afghanistan with its topography is very hard to control.
    3
  39.  Texas Outlaw  Biggest scandal ever ;) Dude in bar has a few beers and is LEAD to say stupid stuff (not even correct on the Bernie platform). - To be fair it was not only the leading questions. If he is indeed on the payroll, they better straighten him out. Starting with being correct on the policy stances of the Sanders campaign. If he is an unpaid volunteer they better correct him, or make do w/o his help. The Sanders campaign has much more than 1 million volunteers, they do not need that one guy.
    3
  40. 2:41 Hillary Clinton grandstanding for "free speech" and freedom of the press - wagging her finger at OTHER nations.
    3
  41. and that he is an antisemite. - I have bets with myself what comes first.
    3
  42. Jimmy overdid it with his self-presentation. I would have liked to hear MORE from Eva.
    3
  43. Well said + Darin Singleton
    3
  44.  @ZIGZAG12345  Russia was in shambles, even the West was initially glad that Putin won the election in 2000. With the endorsement of Yeltsin, no doubt he was promised immunity from criminal prosecution and could run off with the loot. The strongest opponent of Putin then was far right, nationalist, crazy Shirnovsky. The Russian contraction of the economy was worse than during the Great Depression in the U.S. - and in such times the far right does well. Putin stands for moderate economic populism. It had gotten so bad that Yeltsin knew he had to leave, so he arranged himself with Putin. The army did not get paid, civilians did not get their pensions (what is Social security in the U.S.), the West feared there would be under the table sales of biological weapons, military grade uranium, tech, ... by disgruntled military. And the West thought the looting would continue under Putin, that he would be a sober and more intelligent version of Yeltsin but as corrupt, or in the same way corrupt as Yeltsin. That the fmr KGB man would restore some order - and let the foreign oligarchs roam as before. Nope. He is I think actually patriotic (much more than U.S. politicians in the sense that he would not sell out his country wholesale, think trade deals for instance). He might have needed to get along with the the Russian oligarchs (or he gladly colludes with them), but the foreign vultures had to get lost. At least those that did not bring jobs and only extracted from the Russian economy.
    3
  45.  @duckofdeath7250  The U.S. made sure to undermine Latin American governments Of By and For the people for more than 100 years. They colluded with the local oligarchs and kept Mexico etc. poor (most of the people). The U.S. looks good compared to developing countries ? They attract migrants from even poorer countries ? Go figure. At the moment no one from a first world country would like to migrate to the U.S.
    3
  46.  @jivet3919  Two cheeks of the same backside (George Galloway)
    3
  47. Listen to it 12:24 "...most progressives are weeded out in primaries - if not, the Dems have very effective structural processes at many levels to deal with them. ......Progressives do not take the party over - the party takes them over." - That would be another reason for Sanders to cooperates with them, he had to chase them for some time to get a few of them to sign up to Medicare for All (despite the fact that it could not be passed in spring 2017 anyway). But when it comes to NOT offending donors the Dems are not willing to risk something.
    3
  48. She cannot UNDERSTAND why Hillary lost - it implicates her husband.
    3
  49. So nothing has changed since they illegally surveilled MLK ?? Shocking, shocking ....
    3
  50. Internet service providers have a natural monopoly. As shows clearly in the U.S. A major part of the population has two or less !! providers. (see John Oliver he had a hilarious piece * on net neutrality in 2014 or 2015, it is on youtube, including that date). The lack of competition shows in the price and service level of of U.S. consumers. And when there was a large merger discussed (Time Warner with ? Comcast, again see * ) - the investors and shareholders - not the consumers or the regulators - were placated. No the merger would NOT mean more competition and thus less profit (each of us has our turf, we will continue to not bother each other. -The formulation was slightly different, but only slightly - also see the film in the Godfather). The beauty of such a merger: when it goes through, they could LEGALLY agree on prices and where to operate, they could improve their monopoly and defend your status as sole provider - as long as they are independent corporations at least in theory anti trust laws apply. That merger was called off after being duscussed heatedly (by consumers ! ) - maybe the shareholders did not see the advantage considering the costs of the transaction, maybe the regulators indicated they would not allow it.
    3