Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "The Damage Report"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
@aaronjohnson4678 It's a good post - but can you edit it with a few paragraphes ? would make it much easier to read. - as for the wood planting program, that turned out to be one of FDR's most popular programs. they wanted to invest into infrastructure, but that takes time for planning. FDR was always for trying out things and implementing them fast, they could always tweak, correct or end the experiment.
The forests had been ravaged (droughts of the 1930s). so unmarried men were under the leadership of fmr military officers and did logging and planting.
The family men stayed in civilization and had less competition for jobs.
Some pale city slickers got a work out, fresh air and sun. and potentially also better food. Also: the devil has always work for idle hands as the saying goes. I guess their families were glad they were gone where they could not get into grouble with law enforcement (this was the time of prohibition, the mob, so jobless young men were often recruited by them), and they likely could not get a young lady pregnant either.
The families of these young men likely were glad they had an income, more space at home while they were away, and kept out of trouble. That improvised program was very popular.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I currently live in a country (Austria) that has doubled down on a strict measures recently : Loosening of masks mandate was reversed beginning July I think. That was to deal with some mass break outs, but it looked good. And the numbers were low, despite some clusters here and there. Mid June to August looked good in most European countries, so they allowed travel and tourism bounced back - but I think that set them up for the wave of fall. First bad signs end of August, but then it grew from a low level, so there was some hope it could be contained.
Then shorter hours for night bars and restaurants, then a lockdown Lite (but fewer kinds of shops and businesses closed and schools stayed open, so less severe than in spring), and then the very recent emergency measures that will end soon. They shut down again all non-essential businesses and shops and schools (but emergency services if parents have to work).
And now also a curfew from 8 pm to 5 or 6 am, but you can leave the house to take a walk, or to jog, and of course for necessary trips (commute, visiting relatives that need help) - with the curfew they can outlaw gatherings of more people after 8 pm.
It worked the R(eff) numbers are now down from the record of 1.5 (that means 50 % growth, and sadly growth at a high level of case numbers) to approx. 0.9 so the number of cases is finally dropping.
Last time I checked intense care units had 40 % free capacity. So worrying, and record level in Austria, but not yet catastrophic (like Italy in spring !). That situation improved and will continue to improve.
You can assume that 1 % of diagnosed cases (positive test) will die (other countries have 1.5 % sometimes 2 % or even more if they are in bad shape) Somewhere between 1 - 2 % seems a realistic number for most first world countries - I checked out several nations, it depends how they test, and some nations got a lot of their deaths in spring so that may also skew the numbers because testing was not fully deployed.
Here they plan to reopen on Dec. 6th and to save the Christmas shopping season - and to have mass testings for approx. 65 % of the population (voluntary). So right after the shutdown they will try to catch as many infected as possible. These persons should be able to leave quarantine just before Christmas :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
Death-by-a-thousand-cuts voters suppression strategies diliegently and consistently put in place over many years. All of that could be undone in one swoop if voters use mail ballots a lot. Plus: there is a paper trail - in case there are voting machines in place w/o backup with processes that on principle cannot be audited. It used to be in Ohio and parts of Texas.
Voting by mail also makes elections cheaper, especially in rural areas.
Drawing attention to that form of voting and making it widespread may have been the secret blessing of the pandemic. It was necessary for safety reason - but not wonder Republican politicians and president reject freaked out and badmouthed it.
In Georgia they introduced mail by vote years ago (and committed AA voters avoided it for fear of their vote being stolen or disappeared). GA had generous mail by vote laws as long as they thought that would help with Republican turnout. But in 2018 when Stacy Abrams almost won they freaked out already. Now they are in full swing of voter suppression.
There are lots of sneaky measures to put the less wealthy on a disadvantage when it comes to voting. (Note: Democrats also do not want them to vote - in primaries !) Republicans have worked SO HARD to put them all in place, they shave off a little here and there, in the end 0.1 - 0.5 % is enough to win elections (or 537 in Florida in 2000) even if that advantage is the result of 10 different voters suppression strategies, that have to be diligently ! and consistently ! carried out.
Mail ballot undermines all these strategies very easily. If people get used to it, they also do not fall for the typical blunders. Not signing on the outside, or if your state demands the signature of a witness.
If you have been secretly purged from the rolls under the assumption that you had voted in another state last time (nope that was a person with the same name). Then you ask for your mail ballot to be sent (or better it is possible to do that online), that will become obvious.
Then you can at least prove that there are people (dead or alive) who happens to have the same name, sometimes even the same birth date, but they are different people. Or you are "not on the ballot" because of a mistaken purchase. Democratic primary in New York in 2016.
40 % of people of Korean descent have the last name "Kim".
African Americans often got the names of their plantation or slave holding family. Therefore the name base for AA is not nearly as diverse as for people of European descent (Italian, French, Czech, Polish, English, German; Spanish .... names).
There will be more people with the same name among black and brown people. Especailly if the country has 330 million people.
Republicans let tax payers pay for the lawsuits when they are challenged by NGO's and the work of voter disenfranchisement is done by people that get their salary from the taxpayer. Sure it is an ongoing effort - but they get paid for it and if pays off in electoral wins, so why not.
It is hard to register, easy to become the victim of a very targeted purge, it is harder for people who do not have a passport (can't afford international travel) and do not have a driver's licence (young, poor, elderly while low income).
it is a hassle if you come from another state and there is a tiny difference between SS data and driver's licence.
They can close down polling stations and / or allocate voting machines to the low income areas. That way one can plan for loooong waiting times for the people that they do not want to vote.
Who do not have white collar jobs and often less flexibility to come later one day. Nor can they afford the babysitter because they are gong to vote and that can take anywhere from 1 - 5 hours.
And it does help if elections are on a work day. In combination with having 1 - 2 hours waiting time - that can suppress 0.2 or 0.3 % of the total vote.
To be fair more often that not Democrats do not give the voters much to vote for and the experience of having waited long LAST TIME (and the only mild motivation to make such sacrifices) is an effective deterrent. Let's say another 0.1 - 0.2 % of avoided votes for Democrats.
1
-
Democrats * are financed by the SAME big donors as Republicans (certainly industries, often companies or even individuals). They are _paid to win primaries against New Deal type_s - and there they use the same voters suppression tactics as Republicans if challenged by a grassroots candidate (not as widespread, maybe not quite as brazen most of the time - but they do.
* well, most of them, and not all fully, they are not as much beholden to the big donors, but it is bad enough
The D establishment and big donor candidates get remarkably resourceful and put up a spirited if sneaky fight. One would not know they have it in them, if you only watch them interact with Republican competition.
Just in case you have ever wondered about the deafening silence in the past, let's say the last 20 years. Some complaining about voter ID laws, but crickets on hackable voting machines or election results that on principle cannot be verified.
Or Operation Crosscheck of 2016, Greg Palast contacted the DNC, the Sanders campaign, I am sure offered the story to the "liberal" outletsand would have pleased to appear.
No one would violate "decorum" to question the integrity of U.S. elections. Greg Palast is a long time investigative journalist, got noticed with his reporting on Florida 2000, but was reporting on the (nuclear) energy industry before. He is not a wild quack, so WHY was HE so widely ignored in 2016 - a database of millions of "ethnic" names of 16 R run states with voters who happened to have similar or same names and had voted in past elections.
Republicans insinuated the crime of double voting in the past (A person with a certain name had voted in the same election twice. Must have been double voting, sometimes defying the laws of time and space. Could't possibly be that in a country with 330 million people some persons share the same name in the same or one of the other 49 states. They did not use the birth date to differentiate between the entries, which is odd because that would have drastically reduced the number of "suspicious" case. There have been cases where a person had the same name - think some Robert Brown or Mary King or another generic name and they even had the same birth date. But such coincidences are rarer. That would not have produced more than a million names ready for purge.
Republicans did not prosecute they were very secretive about the operation and also did not include D run states in the effort to find the alleged criminals - no, they just intended to purge them.
Greg Palast is well known for his work on election integrity in the past, someone leaked the database to him. There are some coders that have to work on such aprogram, it is not hard to make a copy, and one of them was obviously not O.K. with it.
So it is all the more astonishing how much he was ignored in 2016. Not even the Sanders campaign dared to go there, so I suspect there must be strong pressure to not go as far as openly and boldly call the Republicans stealers of election.
Well, Trump has readjusted the norms - also in that resepct. And Dems will hopefully abandon the stance of sophisticated fecklessness now.
Stacy Abrams was a pleasant surprise, she acknowledged that Kemp would become govenor, but she did not concede. Usually Democrats are supposed to roll over with a whimper when an election was stolen from them. Also surprising: that Corporate media even reported, that she was given some airtime on national TV. The anti Trump sentiment, the desire for a Blue Wave in 2018 was strong enough, the "liberal" networks wanted Dems to have a strong 2018 midterm outcome, and a Democrat winning the govenor race of GA would have been a welcome addition.
Likewise in 2020 Biden and the Democratic establishment wanted enough to win and they knew only with mail ballot he could turn out the Democratic base (that took the infection risks more seriously) in sufficient numbers. it was way to close for comfort anyway, it came down to a total of 43,200 votes in 3 states (AZ, GA and WI) and Biden needed to win at least ! one of them. If we take PA for granted - which was the 4th state that took so long to call, but at least Biden won there with 1.2 % margin. But PA alone of the 4 nail biter states was not enough. Biden needed 2 out of the 4 in any combination - or Trump would be in charge.
I think they have an inkling that mail ballot could be crucial in the future to be able to win the general while the Republican party drops all pretext - so they are not at least giving it an effort to pass HR1 of 2021. And R voter suppression tactics are getting a lot of attention on mainstream media now. Good !
The big donors do not want the masses to be alerted, their Democrats are not supposed to rock the boat - at least that was the rule of decorum in the past. Sure in the general (especially in the House and Senate or state legislature races) they might lose against Republicans that play the same game at the next level. BUT: in the large scheme of things NOTHING is as important as pleasing the donors (and keeping their money coming in for the party & the chance intact to get a cushy job for obedient ex politicians).
Not even winning the general is as important as pleasing the big donors.
The job of Corporate Democrats is to eliminate candidates in the primaries that would put the interests of The People over the interests and profits of the big donors.
For the big donors it is the same if they have a spineless opportunistic Democrat or a Republican that is a fierce ideologue. It is important that the voters are restricted to not really having a choice, either candidate will be beholden to the big donors, and a back and forth of power gives the voters the illusion of difference.
I am painting with a broad brush, many Democrats are better than that - but there are always enough Manchin and Lieberman types that side with Republicans to derail the efforts of the decent crowd, that would serve the voters better. But even the better Democrats have to stay within the limits set by big money and the party "leadership" protecting the intersts of the big donros.
In 2006 the DCCC under Rahm Emanuel saw a Blue Wave coming - and they and big finance pushed Wallstreet Democrats in the primaries.(as if they had an inkling the bubble would burst and they would need their devoted support in the House
1
-
She won the primary with 44 % and approx. 44,000 votes and the next best R had 23 %. That was the first round with 9 candidates. She won then the primary runoff with 57 %. That would have been the time to kick her off the ticket. Thankfully Republicans (also in Georgia) are cowards / craven opportunists. She will not vote differently than a normie Republican (they are all useless), so no damage in that regard for Democrats and she cannot take a gun to the floor.
But she is going to damage the Republicans in Georgia and on the national level, activate the D voters there, eventually she is going to crack or slip up.
It is an attractive district, solidly red, that is why 9 run in the primaries. her online game likely helped her to fundraise, to leverage up her message. She started running in another district, but switched when the incumbent of GA 14 retired (it is a safer seat. A halfway decent R would keep that seat for life, if he / she wants to).
She built her fan base with inflammatory videos, before she ran for office. For instance when she harrassed David Hog (survivor of Parkland shooting) on his way to testify in Congress. Alex Jones style clickbaiting / grandstanding.
She won the general with almost 75 %. It is a solidly red district, and the Democrat that run against her dropped out, they had another Democrat in the race then, but he got only 25 %.
The GA Republican state party knew she is nuts, or at least some realized it: I wonder if they could be bothered to check her out when they accepted her as candidate in the primary. Probably, her opponents must have googled her (opposition research) BUT I guess the order was not to anger HER base.
The 2 Republicans that run for Senate both courted her for her endorsement once she had won the primary. - good thing those 2 are gone. I'll trade their lossess gladly for the new Congress woman. She is so out there that it is better she is in the spotlight. And she will damage the Republicans, while the 2 new D Senators are crucial for the Democrats to score (hello, midterms 2022)
The new D Senators from Georgia have 6 years to build and cement the support from their base, it is easier than for members of Congress that have only 2 year terms.
The state party kept silent, especially since they were a little worried about Biden and the Senate races.
:) - they could as well have done the right thing :)
They did not want to draw attention to the fact that a moron had won the pimary for GA 14 and was set to win the Congress seat in the general. I assume most voters that are in the R camp vote R by default and local news or Fox are not going to inform them. Not sure if "liberal" media picked up on her after the primary, the Independent media for sure did.
I guess the state party could have refused to nominate her. But Georgia Republicans did not want to infuriate the Trump crowd, Moronic Marjorie is just what the Trump cult likes. Like I said: they were a little worried Biden and the D Senate candidates could do well in their state.
Legally speaking: Primaries are NOT an election, they are a selection process of private organizations. They can promise the base it is a democratic process and then override the will of the base, or rig it covertly w/o consequences
(See court ruling when Sanders supporters sued the DNC to return donations, because the DNC rigged the primaries in favor of Hillary Clinton and acitvely tried to keep the campaigns of O'Malley and Sanders down).
1
-
Lincoln D FAST mass rollout would be done like the other FAST mass vaccination progams of the past. Would need some budgets of course. and some intelligent adming. Also offering the producers money (purchasing the doses) that allow them to invest into the manufacturing plants.
Only they did not have the tools of computers, databases and smartphone apps when they managed to vaccinate a lot of people in very srot time (such schemes usually included that not only docotrs but also nurses and even trained lay persons could give the shots. All healthy young people line up to get the shot from the trained soldier or social worker.
The babies and people with preexisitng conditions or if there are any questions are getting the shots from doctors. Ideally most questions are settled already in online counseling or with help of a telephone helpline (staffed with doctors, if need be they could hire retired doctors and nurses for that, they can work form home so no exposure for them).
People get a QR code on their smartphone, or at their desktop computer. The digitally challenged are instructed to write it in orderly ! neatly spaced letters down on a blank sheet of paper. (so the QR code would be displayed as a structured series of numbers. People can get that read out loud (robotic voice) so they can double check once they have written it down.
Very few would show up with only the SS number. (the QR code can contain additional info for instance the date of appointment, or if a 50 % dose - young and healthy - is enough for them. Or if they have any risk factors. That speeds up things at the vaccination site). The mass vaccination site would have a scanner to provide them with their print based on their written note.
staff with scanners can easily keep track of everyone that has registered to get a vaccine and did come (or not). And then enter all that got it (in some cases it might not be deemed safe). Speaking of lines, people could get an appointment (show up between 1 and 2 pm). That could be updated online so people see that they can come 30 minutes earlier (if they can make it) or there is a delay of 2 hours, their group is delayed. That would prevent having lines.
I do not know how the nations handle the admin (I am not in a risk group) but that would be a workable scenario. And if this would be about war spending they could find the budgets and manpower for it, no problem.
If the authorities have the vacciness, getting people vaccinated fast and in high numbers should not be a problem at all. They did it in the past with much more primitive and time consuming tools of adminstration / keeping files.
It's been a while since the UK ploughed throuth the blitz and WW2, clearly they had a more competent government then. And maybe also a more cooperative population.
1
-
Biasannd tribalism beats intelligence most of the time - they are supported by much older parts of the brain. That is ALSO the case for all other humans incl. "liberals" and lefties. Just have a discussion with hardcore Hillary Clinton supporters. The hubris of her tone deaf 2016 campaign is a proof for that, too.
Those experienced, highly paid people were unable to read the signs on the wall. Michael Moore got it - he had his ear on the ground and his future lucrative contracts did not depend on ignoring the plight of the masses so his conscience would not bother him.
Once you must ignore part of reality to have peace of mind while pursuing your selfish interests you by necessity lose contact with reality to some degree. One cannot ignore reality that selectively. Fooling yourself in some areas spills over. Clinton could in all seriousness enthusiastically be for TPP. Bush1 could not get NAFTA passed, but her husband could fool and trick the unions (he needed them initially to get elected). She must have noticed that. Then she could watch live the devastation caused by NAFTA also in Mexico. Followed by the desaster of the Chinese tariff agreements. Around 1 million plants closed in the U.S. ! after that was pulled off. So in what alternative universe would a person allegedly for the little people and the workers be pro TPP ?
She could not square her service for the big donors with the sales pitch to the voters. Later her strategists told her it would sell better if she would declare to be against TPP - she could watch that with Sanders and Trump - so she followed that. Not that the voters were fooled by it. But I think SHE and her consultants really thought the masses would buy that marketing gag. The double think they have to pull off (we claim to be for the little people PLUS what we really do is to work for the Big Donors) messes with their judgement.
people can do that doublethink for many selfish reasons - not only for financial gains. Racial and other prejudice can be very satisfying for the ego. Being judgemental, keeping some people out and BELOW, messing with the rights and freedoms of other people (like the abortion debate or gay marriage, or drug use).
More people join the scapegoating EXCLUDING crowd if they think there is not enough for eveybody (which is a result of neoliberal economic policies since the 80s). Wanting borders and insider/outsider gropus is a personality trait. People that did not have a loving upbringing are more prone to being spiteful and willing to scapegoating.
People need to improve their EQ. that is not a subject that can be taught in school - if anything that could be TAUGHT by the example of parents and teachers. In the meantime government should make sure the economy works for everyone, that parents do not need to work so long hours, that there are after school activities so that children and teenagers are supervised.
They would need to give reasonable, decisive help and support for underprivileged communities (it is not only about money !! prison reform, drug reform, gentrification, ... school reform, fighting addiction, reforming foster care, etc. - it would be an ambitious 15 year program to turn things around).
We can assume there will always be a group of deplorable. When the economy works for everyone and crime rates are low etc. - it is possible to shut these people up (the whites that resisted the Civil Rights Movement in the south were not under economic distress - they were just plain racists).
1
-
Yep, Amazon would have delayed negotiations, fought the result for years (they can stall a lot and they can afford the lawyers) and then closed shop and opened trhe warehouse elsewhere. Only the Biden admin signalling that they will step on their toes big time if they try to pull that move might have made a difference. Or even better: promising Bessemer other jobs and an employment program IF Amazon leaves AND announcing it will have consequences for Amazon (or Walmart or any company that pulls such a move).
The wife of the govenor of AR - Hillary Clinton - was at the board of Walmart. That was cheap. True, the govenor of AR has a measly salary. That is expensive for the voters.
Amazon (but also Walmart) are so large that they can do that (and afford the costs) never mind that they will blackmail (and find) other politicians that give them a lot of tax dollars to compensate them for the move. It is even worse with Amazon, Walmart at least has to be close enough to the consumers.
But Amazon can punish Bessemer. The whole city ! - they used to have steel but the city has lost a lot of jobs, so NOW Amazon is the biggest employer in town - and can DICTATE the conditions. No doubt local politicians collude willingly with them.
See how a governor threatened the VW plant workers a few years ago IF they would vote to unionize, he told them that the state would withold subsidies for VW in that case. so that VW would have an incentive to go elsewhere. (he did not say that part out loud, but the threat to withhold subsidies IF they would unionize was a clear statement. Let that sink in a politician in a poor red state that needs the working class to get elected. It is possible that ).
I must say the European voters are not quite as subservient, no matter the mindset of a politician in Europe they would not dare to be so oppen in their contempt for blue collars and about the level of collusion with big biz.
Walmart closes shops when they cannot prevent unionzation. In Canada, too mind you. And there they came back after a while to resume biz, wouldn't want to give up a good spot, would we ?
Now in Europe the competition of a large retail chain would be ecstatic, they would be pleased to take that biz. Not in the U.S. or Canada where obviously competition in retail has been reduced to a degree that they can close the shop just for the heck of it - and to make a point how they will crush worker's representation.
In Europe they would also be dragged for that move (also by media).
That is why retail - and Amazon - is unionized in Europe (resp. they have elected worker's boards). While Bessemer was voting down the union, some Italian distribution centers had just finished a short strike to enforce better conditions (time for hygiene because of CoVid-19. Amazon did not need long ! to give in, they did not want the bad press and missing out on biz. And taking CoVid19 not seriously does not fly in Italy, not after what they went through in spring 2020). I know that German warehouses discussed (or had) strikes in the busiest time (before Christmas) a few years ago.
Certain employment practices do not fly either. Like the idea with robots prompting the workers all the time, the pace is also very high there, but they cannot make humans part of the robotic chain, where the humans become cogs. Or people show up to work and then they are told whether or not they are needed. And on the other hand 10 hour shifts.
That too does not even make sense from a biz perspective, productivity goes even down after 8 hours and certainly after 10 hours with an intense pace. people can grind for a while or a season, but if that is ongoing they are worn out. Well, that is when Amazon spits them out.
There must be some psychopathy going on and a certain mindset be cultivated. if it is even against business interests to show and express their contempt for the working people that much.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jnb756 to be fair Dems also do some riling up (see Russia, Russia stole our election) but Dems are mild compared to the animosity cultivated by Repubs. Repbulicans are fierce and take no prisoers when they have majorities, and expect Democrats to roll over when they have a mandate. Sadly Dems (the spineless opportunists) often go along.
There is much more hostility from one side than the other. The monster got a life of its own: owning the libs became almost a policy.
I read a story of a town in the South and some scandal intrigue in their fairly fundamentalistic church. The new pastor (hired as aide) tried to get the job of the established pastor and spead romours that he was "too liberal". The poster then was very connected to the church and considered the pastor to be a friend, so he started to ask friends, what they had heard.
It was never specified what too liberal meant - and his source could not tell him any specific accusations. He added: In our church that is a kiss of death.
See The Victory Channel (Jan 8th, upload: Trump will have a second term he is god's chosen one, Biden is the toll of the devil / evil):
Republicans have started courting Evangelicals also in the 1980s (before they were not nearly as in your face religous and had reasonable views on abortion. Or guns. Some did not like abortion, but disliked the outcomes of backalley abortions even more. A Republican would not dare say that today ).
so the disgust / hate / contempt was cultivated, it was part of the stratagy to rile up people. Winning is everything, and it helped them to win - with fringe groups.
But you have to increase the dose if your strategy is based on negativity, exclusion, adversity, and contempt.
Now what they gladly tolerated (also against Obama) because it was politically convenient, starts to backfire.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iyeball7792 Trump wants issues to rile up the base in the hope they will overlook his completely inept handling of the crisis. Wearing masks has become one of the wedge issues. He is too cowardly to openly say: "Do not wear one, refuse to."
Trump seems to be sufficiently intimidated by the expertise and reputation of Dr. Fauci, or at least by the polling that he enjoys a lot of trust in the population despite the underhanded attacks by the admin. Trump let his stooges (Peter Navarro and do the work, to have plausible deniability.
enough that he did not fire him, even though Dr. Fauci has publicly if politely contradicted Trump).
But Trump is all over the place instead of leading by example. Most importantly: He is too vain to wear one. If he had done that and early on he could have united the country and shown leadership (as soon as the agencies recommended wearing one, which they did AFTER they were sure they had enough for medical staff).
Trump must not tell his base to refuse to wear masks, and do make that about their fREedOm he makes the half baked contradictory uncommitted comments, his cabinet does the rest of the heavy lifting to rile up the base. Boom.
What should be a scientifict question (and we learn as we gather more information, the novel coronavirus is unchartered territory) has become an ideological question and an expression of identity, ....
the virus does not care about party affiliation.
I would not mind Trump fans being infected at much higher rates if they chose to be cavalier. But: they spread it in the community. To other people. To family and friends and co-workers that are not willfully ignorant and eager to be controversial (on THAT issue, no less).
Last but not least: essential workers and even more so all medical staff (doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, ...) have higher risks. It is not only catching the virus, or not. It is about virus load. How much you catch. And time of exposure. Low level exposure over long time, while being overworked and sleep deprived (not good for the immune system).
There is a chance that pregnancy is also a risk factor. So pregnant young healthy healthcare workers died. Not all of them are spring chickens. Think age 40, 50 .... so higher risks to get it and to have severe or very severe symptoms. Not all that survive to wall aferwards, some have lung damage, young people get blood clots, they get diabetes 1, ....
They are longer time in buildings with higher load, they have ventilation in those buildings (that moves that around, that is how whole choires or bars got infected) and they have the looooong time of exposure.
Wearing PPE does fail, it also failed with ebola and you bet they were super cautious with that. But it is hard to wear all day every day (nothing like shoppers for 30 minutes), you have to stick to a "protocol " when you change out of it when you had high exposure - I assume there most of the accidents happen. Being stressed and overworked does not help with being super aware and cautious all the time.
If you contribute to the pandemic spreading even more - even if YOU recover well and at home - there is a good chance that you spread it to more people, if you do not wear masks. Not even for a short time.
If infection nubmers are high enough it will inevitably hit vulnerable people, and medical staff is at the top of that pyramide and not in a good way (and meat plant workers).
Remember that long before that crisis many professionals had to wear a mask in their line of work for a whole shifts. If they were lucky only the simple ones that we are supposed to wear now (those that give more protection when you work in construction, or remove asbestos are more uncomfortable to wear. But the workers MUST wear them or they have considerable risks).
Surgeons and nurses assisting them. Medial staff occasonally (in some departments or with some patients). Staff in the food industry or when sorting garbabe. Farm workers working in those overcrowded chicken stables with the terrible stink and bad air (from the concentrated poop, the germs because of the terrible unhygienic condition of the birds - the mask is the least of their discomfort).
But we see adult middle aged persons (interestingly often women) throwing tantrums like toddlers if retail staff or fellow shoppers ask them to wear a mask to support the common effort: to get a grip on the spread of the virus, and to protect others.
1
-
@iyeball7792 The other issue that is glaringly obvious: Trump wants to escalate, it is supposed to help him get reelected. Either violence on the ground, or at least creating division, controversy and propaganda (with help of Fox and the rightwing outlets. If it bleeds, it leads). His goal is to create a narrative of Us Versus Them - and him as tough leader.
Federal government should have stepped up to handle the pandemic. Trump and his cabinet refused, they still refuse to have a coordinated response, acooperation between federal and state government (all states - he instead dunked on the "blue" states in the beginning).
That was their place and their responsibility. Not meddling with the affairs of Portland.
Law abiding citizens and law abiding police (don't we wish) versus the "mob".
An attempt to make Trump look "tough" - screw the constitution and the rightful ROLE for the federal government - and where they should NOT meddle.
The protests of Portland are the business of the local elected government, the constituents, the business community (if they disagree they can seek mediation or controversy with the protesters as they please) and their local police.
Talk about "big government" overreach.
Big government would be needed to handle the PANDEMIC (that means a global ! epidemic). But there the Trump admin messed up. Spectacularly. He let the states fend for themselves (they cannot create money, but the federal government can - and does. QE to the tune of TRILLIONS).
Many R govenors are ideologically blinded morons (and usually puport to be Trump fans) - but to be fair they got nothing in promises of support from this admin. Nothing In the early stage. When it would have been crucial to get general support (population, business community) for the necessary measures. The kind of general support like they have in almost all other rich nations.
De Santis of Florida cowardly left it to the mayors to order shutdowns (spring break !). - In other countries they also have the approach to handle some pandemic responses NOW on the state / province or even city level. But of course no one tries to stir up controversy, they still coordinate and cooperate. And help each other out.
btw: Germany took in patients from France and Italy. Austria took in patients from Italy. China got medical staff from all over the country into Wuhan (when they finally took it seriously they really stepped up their game). Set up field hospitals within 10 days.
Other nations helped each other. But no cooperation between the states in the U.S. - it was "every state is on their own, don't expect help from the federal government. Good luck to you"
Trump did not kick the behinds of Congress and Senate (both beholden to the big donors, with a few exceptions)
Fed / treasury bailed out Wallstreet on March 12, 2020 with 1,5 TRILLION USD (QE) - there was not even discussion about a stimulus bill at that time. That money is outside of any stimulus bill, of course no strings attached. Of course Trump cares about the stock exchange (and finance). They got help and FAST.
Also no decision then if even testing would be free (never mind treatment). So low income people took a gamble if they had symptoms that could be CoVid-19. If they were young THEY likely would survive. They could not afford to forgo the wage, and they did not have the money for testing or hospital. so they went to work and spread it further.
Also no ramping up of testing capacities - as per mid July 2020 one gets the test results after 7 - 10 days in Florida.
What ???
Meanwhile other countries reopened, they try to keep toursism going (but not from the U.S.), have low case numbers, even those countries that were hit hard in spring (before the U.S. so the Trump admin could have learned from their warning examples) are back to fairly normal.
You bet they have their FAST testing in place, they watch any flare ups like hawks. To nip it in the bud. They did not catch it in time in early spring (February) - but that is not going to happen to them again. It took lockdowns of the whole country to get to where they were in early March (but now with PPE, testing in place, and hospitals prepared). They certainly do not want to have to repeat a lockdown, so every effort is made to keep case numbers down. Wearing masks. It is a no brainer..
You cannot fight a pademic with half baked, inconsistent measures. Too little too late. If you are not bold enough you undermine the gains you made. That is what happened in the U.S.
U.S. states could not dare to share resources with other states - they would only dare to do that if they trust that if they are in trouble in 1 or 2 months, they too will get help. The other states may not be able to reciprocate, if they are still overwhelmed (No one knew how this would end, the example of Italy was scary. The novel corona virus was unchartered territory. - Italy were the first to get a lot of cases outside of China in a country where you could trust the numbers, they did not catch it early on- The only chance you have with an epidemic or wildfire - contain it in the early stage or suffer the pain.
ONLY the federal government has the power (incl. the power to create money !), the authority to invoke and USE the Defense Production Act, the options of diplomacy and international cooperation, the resources to assure the states that they will get help if it is their turn. No matter how bad it may get.
So the states would not have to hoard material, and resources, federal government could incentivize staff (with money) to help out in other states (that means higher costs of living, travel expenditures, costs for pets. Part of making it easy for staff to move would be money, but part would have been help to organize that. Travel, housing, practical solutions for pets they have to leave behind, ....
That could be shifted around where they were needed the most at the moment. Which means there are not that many unused reserves (just in case) - the existing resources and reservess ! are used more efficiently.
There is a place for regional / state response to CoVid-19.
Not in the beginning though. Not in March.
Then it was all hands on deck in other nations (the U.S. fumbling around incoherently). Representatitives of federal and states government met and COORDINATED. See Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, Italy, Greece, Australia, Canada, ...
In the U.S. governors would have had to tell their business community and voters that it was scientifically warranted to have a shutdown. But no idea or promises about help. If, when, for whom, what speciifically, or to what extent. - ANY help ?
the governors met with Trump - they returned empty handed.
New York, California, Wahsington are rich states, so they had some wriggle room to handle it on their own - as this admin was Missing In Action.
Meanwhile the Trump admin for show invoked the Defense Production act - but did not use it. That would have meant stepping on the toes of the big donors.
The Trump admin did not step in as central buyer of PPE - so the states had to bid against each other, bidding up prices to get PPE, which federal government also had failed to stockpile (undoing what Obama had set in place after ebola in 2013).
The big donors (that had showered the RNC and the Trump campaign with money) loved it. Profits !!! Screw the country.
1
-
1
-
@iyeball7792 Of course Trump wants to CREATE controversy. Wants to have MORE police overreach (if these are even agents or police) - when that is the reason people protest in the first place.
Let that sink in: in absence of lasting achievements - Trump tries to win on that. He had a chance to really shine since spring . Oh, well ....
Trump and his cabinet would hate it if the local police and the city of Portland would come to an agreement about police reform.
One that is meaningful and satisfies the protesters. They would hate it if the protests would end.
Painting a picture of the "scary others" and trying to pose as tough is all Trump has left.
He does not mind that he creates division.
He would do everything to get elected. Screw the country. Doesn't care about unnecessary deaths.
The big donors want the serfs to return to work, they got bailed out but they would hate a bailout for the masses. So they want to force schools to open. if there are no open public schools, it would look really bad for the Trump admin to not support parents of children, so one parent can stay home. they have no intention to invest that money. Schools open signals: normalcy (whether that is true or not).
It will mean hundreds of thousands of more deaths. (Schools are hubs, many cases with no or very light symptoms with children. and they connect the generations. The kids will suvive - but they bring the virus into the families.
They (Trump admin, their donors) are also not willing to invest the money to make "return to normal" at least somewhat safer.
All other countries watch their LOW case numbers (achieved after a determined lockdown) like hawks and do strategic testing whenever they have, or suspect a cluster.
Trump in July 2020: Testing is overrated.
Testing makes his handling look bad. That is all that matters to him. Screw the country.
At some point the virus will fade out or there will be a vaccine.
Even the bubonic plague run its course after devastating countries (for some years, it returned after 5, 10, 15 years).
The Spanish Flu ended after 2 years by itself: 50 million dead (600,000 in the U.S.) It killed young(er) people up to the age of 40 for the most part. Many children, too.
1
-
1