NDL Forum

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:52 am**

With my previous post, I completely understand that the studies are showing that the death rate is no where near what we originally thought, but that also doesn't mean that we shouldn't have done anything.
To nick's point, when you have more die in one month than in a normal season of the flu, how much worse would the numbers have been had we not taken the actions that we have to lessen the numbers?

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:34 am**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:25 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:12 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:44 pm Sooooooooo did the trump administration fuck up that PPP loan program or what???? Seems like everyday something else comes out that's shady as hell with the way funds were distributed.

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-donor-hotels-ppp
Headline:
"One Trump Donor’s Hotel Companies Got $96.1 Million Meant for Small Businesses"

Suggestion:
A donor paid Trump $50k to get access to the funds

Actual Issue in the Article:
Poorly written bill that allowed hotels and restaurants with less than 500 employees per location to receive funds.

Do you even do ANY critical thinking before taking in this non-sense or do you just see "Orange Man Bad" and you can't contain yourself?

Many large companies that arguably shouldn't have taken the money did take it. Is anyone shocked that businesses found a loophole with a government program and took advantage of it? I'm fairly certain if we grabbed the CEO/Chairman of all of these companies that we'd see that they donated to all kinds of political figures. I mean, it was a Dem introduced act, so shouldn't we have a counter argument that the House colluded to get over for all of their donors that we find? Oh yeah, that doesn't generate clicks... my bad, forgot.
You don't read to well do ya?

Sorry for dissecting the BS from your slanted OpEd writer. I mean, someone you probably think is neutral and giving you good info.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:44 am**

ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:34 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:25 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:12 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:44 pm Sooooooooo did the trump administration fuck up that PPP loan program or what???? Seems like everyday something else comes out that's shady as hell with the way funds were distributed.

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-donor-hotels-ppp
Headline:
"One Trump Donor’s Hotel Companies Got $96.1 Million Meant for Small Businesses"

Suggestion:
A donor paid Trump $50k to get access to the funds

Actual Issue in the Article:
Poorly written bill that allowed hotels and restaurants with less than 500 employees per location to receive funds.

Do you even do ANY critical thinking before taking in this non-sense or do you just see "Orange Man Bad" and you can't contain yourself?

Many large companies that arguably shouldn't have taken the money did take it. Is anyone shocked that businesses found a loophole with a government program and took advantage of it? I'm fairly certain if we grabbed the CEO/Chairman of all of these companies that we'd see that they donated to all kinds of political figures. I mean, it was a Dem introduced act, so shouldn't we have a counter argument that the House colluded to get over for all of their donors that we find? Oh yeah, that doesn't generate clicks... my bad, forgot.
You don't read to well do ya?
Sorry for dissecting the BS from your slanted OpEd writer. I mean, someone you probably think is neutral and giving you good info.

Try and read this real slow so that it will sink in for you. The good info was that a billion dollar company got funds intended for "small" businesses thus the statement about the "shady way funds were distributed" in my original post. The bias you like to find in everything to fit your world view is really disturbing. The campaign donation is just icing on the cake and is just par for the coarse in government.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:44 am**

The_Niddler wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:52 am With my previous post, I completely understand that the studies are showing that the death rate is no where near what we originally thought, but that also doesn't mean that we shouldn't have done anything.
To nick's point, when you have more die in one month than in a normal season of the flu, how much worse would the numbers have been had we not taken the actions that we have to lessen the numbers?

I agree with you. But I'll also add... is there any proof that we done anything other than delay the inevitable? What we did so far was avoid overwhelming the hospitals during a peak and causing unnecessary death due to lack of care (Italy). I think there's a misconception out there that we've somehow prevented something else.

The biggest win could be that we've bought ourselves time in terms of getting to summer (which appears to be something that will help) and we've delayed serious cases for a short time, getting us closer to a treatment/vaccine. But those were never stated goals. Really just underlying positives (even though I think they are the quite helpful)

Then, for it all to make sense, you have weigh what we've potentially avoided vs what we know it's cost us so far. That's where opinion gets messy. While some people believe we avoided 300k deaths, others see conflicting information and don't think it is really that deadly after all.

If you go back to Mar. 12-16, there's a really telling statement that I think we need to remember. I don't recall the exact quote, but it was something like this..."If we do little or nothing and tons of people die, we'll know that we were wrong. But if we take serious action and less than expected die, the public we'll say that we overreacted."

We're in the 2nd part of that statement right now. While there's still going to be some that say we didn't do enough because we had X deaths, there's a decent part of the population that thinks we've overreacted. To me, that's good. What that tells me is that what we did was right. I'd have liked to see more organization throughout the process, more timelines, etc... but I also get that we just haven't learned enough about it to make that happen.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:57 am**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:44 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:34 am
Sorry for dissecting the BS from your slanted OpEd writer. I mean, someone you probably think is neutral and giving you good info.
Try and read this real slow so that it will sink in for you. The good info was that a billion dollar company got funds intended for "small" businesses thus the statement about the "shady way funds were distributed" in my original post. The bias you like to find in everything to fit your world view is really disturbing. The campaign donation is just icing on the cake and is just par for the coarse in government.

1.) As I clearly pointed out, there were many 'billion dollar companies' that took advantage of it. This article decided to find one that they could tie to a $50k donation to Trump. It's not "Icing on the cake" when the title of the article points to the connection. It's the intent of the article. This is fundamental shit that you should have picked up before your teens. I know you've said you're not the smartest guy, but FFS, this is a bit much.

2.) As for the "shady way funds were distributed..." The bill was written by house dems and they jerked around throughout the process. The lenders are going to administer it based on what is most efficient and effective for them. They didn't make the rules, they just followed them. So of course they looked toward their clients first and took care of what they could immediately. Nothing about that is 'shady.' It's common sense.

3.) I understand you saw people talking about worldview and now you have a new catchy term... the next step is using it right. I get what you're trying to say, but it's not what you think it is.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am**

Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:31 am**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..

You posted slanted trash, then proceeded with the laff-a-lympics version of mental gymnastics to justify it.

Your victory speech is apparently this quote.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:39 am**

ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:31 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..
You posted slanted trash, then proceeded with the laff-a-lympics version of mental gymnastics to justify it.

Your victory speech is apparently this quote.

It's crazy how we are just mirror images of each other huh

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:46 am**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:39 am It's crazy how we are just mirror images of each other huh

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:50 am**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:39 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:31 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..
You posted slanted trash, then proceeded with the laff-a-lympics version of mental gymnastics to justify it.

Your victory speech is apparently this quote.
It's crazy how we are just mirror images of each other huh

Sure... go on and grab a quote of me posting slanted trash and trying to justify it.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:52 am**

ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:50 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:39 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:31 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..
You posted slanted trash, then proceeded with the laff-a-lympics version of mental gymnastics to justify it.

Your victory speech is apparently this quote.
It's crazy how we are just mirror images of each other huh
Sure... go on and grab a quote of me posting slanted trash and trying to justify it.

My opinion like yours of me is that everything you say is "slanted trash". So thanks for proving my point.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:10 pm**

ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:56 am
GeorgesGoons wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 1:52 pm Once again, you are taking 30 seconds from a 50 minute video because you don't want to see the whole picture. Did you see the numbers for New York that they mentioned? Or all of California?

For all of the US, there have been 5.5M tests. Of those tests 17.4% have resulted in a positive. So if you assume 17.4% of the US are/have been positive for COVID-19 then your death rate is now 0.08%

These numbers were taken from the Politico site I posted above.
I'm not going to track through that whole back and forth... but this isn't a realistic representation.

You can't assume that the 17.4% applies to the whole population, because of the 5.5m that were tested, many of them met a high level criteria suggesting that they have it. The national infection certainly isn't 17.4%.

So our death rate would be even less than .08% ?

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:11 pm**

The_Niddler wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:25 am
GeorgesGoons wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 12:34 pm
nick wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 12:28 pm remember folks.. 40k a yr die from the Flu in the US in the most severe year in a decade..

54 000 died in 1 month due to Covid..

crazy that US put in unreal lockdown measures and still had more people die in 1 month than an entire flu season..

shouldnt of locked down IMO.. you guys overreacted
Here is a callous take on it:

How many of those 54k were going to die anyways from all the other underlying conditions they had?

The underlying conditions that people have are what makes Covid-19 so dangerous.
To you and me George, we would be ok. Our body would most likely fight it off like the flu with no real struggles.

Covid-19, when it hits people that have something else wrong with them, that is when it is very hard to treat and get rid of.

So to take a view and say, oh, well, they would have died anyways. No, that is not necessarily true.
I am sure in some cases, sure, the person would have still died anyways, but someone having an autoimmune disease, say, something like Lupis, they will leave a long lift with Lupis, but if they come in contact with Covid-19, it is a real dangerous struggle for them.

So you have to understand, just because someone has an underlying condition doesn't mean they were already on their death bed.

I fully understand that they weren't on their death bead. But they could have died from the flu

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:56 pm**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:44 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:34 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:25 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:12 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:44 pm Sooooooooo did the trump administration fuck up that PPP loan program or what???? Seems like everyday something else comes out that's shady as hell with the way funds were distributed.

https://www.gq.com/story/trump-donor-hotels-ppp
Headline:
"One Trump Donor’s Hotel Companies Got $96.1 Million Meant for Small Businesses"

Suggestion:
A donor paid Trump $50k to get access to the funds

Actual Issue in the Article:
Poorly written bill that allowed hotels and restaurants with less than 500 employees per location to receive funds.

Do you even do ANY critical thinking before taking in this non-sense or do you just see "Orange Man Bad" and you can't contain yourself?

Many large companies that arguably shouldn't have taken the money did take it. Is anyone shocked that businesses found a loophole with a government program and took advantage of it? I'm fairly certain if we grabbed the CEO/Chairman of all of these companies that we'd see that they donated to all kinds of political figures. I mean, it was a Dem introduced act, so shouldn't we have a counter argument that the House colluded to get over for all of their donors that we find? Oh yeah, that doesn't generate clicks... my bad, forgot.
You don't read to well do ya?
Sorry for dissecting the BS from your slanted OpEd writer. I mean, someone you probably think is neutral and giving you good info.
Try and read this real slow so that it will sink in for you. The good info was that a billion dollar company got funds intended for "small" businesses thus the statement about the "shady way funds were distributed" in my original post. The bias you like to find in everything to fit your world view is really disturbing. The campaign donation is just icing on the cake and is just par for the coarse in government.

*Course.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:05 pm**

Seeitsaveit13 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:56 pm
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:44 am

Try and read this real slow so that it will sink in for you. The good info was that a billion dollar company got funds intended for "small" businesses thus the statement about the "shady way funds were distributed" in my original post. The bias you like to find in everything to fit your world view is really disturbing. The campaign donation is just icing on the cake and is just par for the coarse in government.
*Course.

Now you are going to get 6 responses from Crowes.

I try not to take the bait, but damn it's so hard not to when he comes up with some crazy shit just because he hates the president.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:15 pm**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:52 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:50 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:39 am
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:31 am
Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:15 am Ok teddy k jr.

1.)Back to the part of you not reading very well and jumping 2.)to conclusions to stroke ur ego of self grandeur in how u 3.)know more and are the only one to see the world thru a 4.)non bias lense.

5.)Did I not say that everyday another story comes out about
6.) the funds??? So yes you are adding nothing new with they 7.)weren't the only ones that did take the money we know that 8.)is the case..
You posted slanted trash, then proceeded with the laff-a-lympics version of mental gymnastics to justify it.

Your victory speech is apparently this quote.
It's crazy how we are just mirror images of each other huh
Sure... go on and grab a quote of me posting slanted trash and trying to justify it.
My opinion like yours of me is that everything you say is "slanted trash". So thanks for proving my point.

Dodge much? Still waiting.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:53 pm**

you really think I'm gonna go dig thru ur posts?

But going just off the top of my head I know there are several occasions of some fauxnews and Breitbart posts where you spewed some right wing filth no question. I'm sorry the GQ article relying on you to put 1+1 from facts together is to tough for your standards.

Just face it you are the right wing nut job to my left wing it's crystal clear buddy so just keep your head in the sand if that helps you get thru ur day. The difference is I can admit my bias.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:02 pm**

GeorgesGoons wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:10 pm
ReignOnU wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:56 am
GeorgesGoons wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 1:52 pm Once again, you are taking 30 seconds from a 50 minute video because you don't want to see the whole picture. Did you see the numbers for New York that they mentioned? Or all of California?

For all of the US, there have been 5.5M tests. Of those tests 17.4% have resulted in a positive. So if you assume 17.4% of the US are/have been positive for COVID-19 then your death rate is now 0.08%

These numbers were taken from the Politico site I posted above.
I'm not going to track through that whole back and forth... but this isn't a realistic representation.

You can't assume that the 17.4% applies to the whole population, because of the 5.5m that were tested, many of them met a high level criteria suggesting that they have it. The national infection certainly isn't 17.4%.
So our death rate would be even less than .08% ?

I'm referring to the fact that the "infection rate" assumption is ridiculous. As for death rate, the depends on what you're using to calculate the death rate. If it's a product of assuming that because 17.4% of the test patients are positive, then that number is way too high... which means your denominator is way too high... which means your .08 is very understated.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:12 pm**

Crowes wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:53 pm you really think I'm gonna go dig thru ur posts?

But going just off the top of my head I know there are several occasions of some fauxnews and Breitbart posts where you spewed some right wing filth no question. I'm sorry the GQ article relying on you to put 1+1 from facts together is to tough for your standards.

Just face it you are the right wing nut job to my left wing it's crystal clear buddy so just keep your head in the sand if that helps you get thru ur day. The difference is I can admit my bias.

No, I didn't think you would, because that would require to provide something to back up your BS... which you've never done and it's why you've done nothing but dance around shit all day.

More so, I don't think you can, because I typically vet stuff before I post it as fact. The offer stands for you to dig up some non-sense that I've posted as truth. This is the forum equivalent of sitting here, arms down, letting you take your best shot.

Posted: **Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:13 pm**

I really gotta stop coming in here daily..

NDL Forum

COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19

Re: COVID-19