Will the Coming Season be Different Because of COVID-19?

[steelreserve]

Why are you posting this in this thread?

This particular tangent got started by Democrats calling for mail-in voting because of COVID, and Trump instead suggesting why not postpone the election instead because mail-in voting is easy pickings for fraud. Followed by our resident liberal advocate wondering whether fraud would be that big of a problem, followed by me saying I don't trust those SOBs under any circumstances now. So that's how we got here, it was originally a virus-related thing.

[Mojouw]

Kodak getting bailed out: https://thehill.com/policy/finance/5...-loan-for-drug

In the same week it becomes clear that the rest of us ain't getting a single dime. Who is going to buy all these fancy pharmaceuticals without a job and benefits?

[Mach1]

Kodak getting bailed out: https://thehill.com/policy/finance/5...-loan-for-drug

In the same week it becomes clear that the rest of us ain't getting a single dime. Who is going to buy all these fancy pharmaceuticals without a job and benefits?

Thats what obamacare is for

[86WARD]

FYI this is a derailed train take it to the dumcratic party thread please, thanks!

So much for this warning...lol

[Mojouw]

Thats what obamacare is for

Fine. But I thought the government wasn't supposed to pick winners and losers in private industry? Why is Kodak getting a bailout rather than mom and pop shops? Maybe because their C suite executives run with the the same folks now running the government?

Say Obamacare functions how you are imagining. Then what you have is the government giving your tax money to Kodak to make medicines when they have no proven track record of doing so and then they are going to pay for those same medicines with your money.

Gotta wonder who running Kodak knows someone. That is a sweetheart deal. And this is the same government who won't consider giving any of our own money to any of us because "too much debt is bad".

[steelreserve]

Kodak getting bailed out: https://thehill.com/policy/finance/5...-loan-for-drug

In the same week it becomes clear that the rest of us ain't getting a single dime. Who is going to buy all these fancy pharmaceuticals without a job and benefits?

Fine. But I thought the government wasn't supposed to pick winners and losers in private industry? Why is Kodak getting a bailout rather than mom and pop shops? Maybe because their C suite executives run with the the same folks now running the government?

Say Obamacare functions how you are imagining. Then what you have is the government giving your tax money to Kodak to make medicines when they have no proven track record of doing so and then they are going to pay for those same medicines with your money.

Gotta wonder who running Kodak knows someone. That is a sweetheart deal. And this is the same government who won't consider giving any of our own money to any of us because "too much debt is bad".

You know, it's almost like there's a very simple solution to both of those problems at once.

Like, what if there wasn't government-created mass unemployment, and companies also didn't need bailouts?

Surely there must be some magical policy that could make that happen. What if there was a word to describe such a fantastic utopia ... "normal?" Nah, that couldn't be it.

Welp, I couldn't figure it out. Never mind boys, back to the lockdown!

[Mojouw]

You know, it's almost like there's a very simple solution to both of those problems at once.

Like, what if there wasn't government-created mass unemployment, and companies also didn't need bailouts?

Surely there must be some magical policy that could make that happen. What if there was a word to describe such a fantastic utopia ... "normal?" Nah, that couldn't be it.

Welp, I couldn't figure it out. Never mind boys, back to the lockdown!

Pandemic or not, bailing out a company that’s been dead on its feet since digital cameras were invented 3 decades ago so they can MAYBE make a drug that MAYBE helps COVID seems like a case of the revolving door between government and private sector boards helping themselves before anyone else. Again. And like the how many times before?

Kodak made horrible decisions and went bust in their core business and now they get a fancy loan to try again at a totally different thing? All while benefits to actual workers are too much for Congress to be asked to do? Cmon. This is bullshit from any angle.

This just happened because some one at Kodak was smart enough to put hudroxycut in the proposal.

[steelreserve]

Pandemic or not, bailing out a company that’s been dead on its feet since digital cameras were invented 3 decades ago so they can MAYBE make a drug that MAYBE helps COVID seems like a case of the revolving door between government and private sector boards helping themselves before anyone else. Again. And like the how many times before?

Kodak made horrible decisions and went bust in their core business and now they get a fancy loan to try again at a totally different thing? All while benefits to actual workers are too much for Congress to be asked to do? Cmon. This is bullshit from any angle.

This just happened because some one at Kodak was smart enough to put hudroxycut in the proposal.

Kodak is basically a completely different company than the one that went bankrupt a decade ago; they don't do much of note, but they essentially break even, so I wouldn't call it a "bailout."

What they have to do with pharmaceuticals is beyond me, so I would definitely call it a questionable plan, unless there is more to it than I know. (If I had to guess: They have a deal lined up to buy some chemical manufacturer or generic drug maker and committed to bringing everything onshore.)

In any event, a $765 million loan is a hell of a lot different than a trillion-dollar cash payout (a million millions) that could really be made unnecessary with a stroke of the pen ("lockdown is over").

The one place where I do agree with this move - dubious as the recipient of the loan may be - is that a huge amount of mass-manufacturing capability for generic pharmaceuticals has been moved overseas in the past 20 years thanks to mergers and the cutthroat nature of the business of making medicine for 5 cents a pill instead of $20. Given the way healthcare is set up in this country, it would be completely viable to make those same drugs in the U.S. for 10 cents a pill and still end up with the same net result to everyone else involved. The one real wildcard, which I have not idea about whatsoever, is whether that might also tie in with the executive order a few days ago to lower drug prices. If this somehow ends up being a hammer that the government can threaten to swing at the Big Pharma cartel to get rid of BULLSHIT, then I would be all for it.

For example, if the first thing that is done with this is that Kodak buys some random laboratory and starts cranking out basic supplies like insulin and Epi-pens at a tenth of the cost that the price gougers are charging now, then you have solved a problem that is draining tens of billions of dollars from people, and pissing everybody off, for a small fraction of that price, which would then almost certainly be paid back. In fact, watch, I bet that is the plan; I would even put a token amount of money on it.

[Mojouw]

Kodak is basically a completely different company than the one that went bankrupt a decade ago; they don't do much of note, but they essentially break even, so I wouldn't call it a "bailout."

What they have to do with pharmaceuticals is beyond me, so I would definitely call it a questionable plan, unless there is more to it than I know. (If I had to guess: They have a deal lined up to buy some chemical manufacturer or generic drug maker and committed to bringing everything onshore.)

In any event, a $765 million loan is a hell of a lot different than a trillion-dollar cash payout (a million millions) that could really be made unnecessary with a stroke of the pen ("lockdown is over").

The one place where I do agree with this move - dubious as the recipient of the loan may be - is that a huge amount of mass-manufacturing capability for generic pharmaceuticals has been moved overseas in the past 20 years thanks to mergers and the cutthroat nature of the business of making medicine for 5 cents a pill instead of $20. Given the way healthcare is set up in this country, it would be completely viable to make those same drugs in the U.S. for 10 cents a pill and still end up with the same net result to everyone else involved. The one real wildcard, which I have not idea about whatsoever, is whether that might also tie in with the executive order a few days ago to lower drug prices. If this somehow ends up being a hammer that the government can threaten to swing at the Big Pharma cartel to get rid of BULLSHIT, then I would be all for it.

For example, if the first thing that is done with this is that Kodak buys some random laboratory and starts cranking out basic supplies like insulin and Epi-pens at a tenth of the cost that the price gougers are charging now, then you have solved a problem that is draining tens of billions of dollars from people, and pissing everybody off, for a small fraction of that price, which would then almost certainly be paid back. In fact, watch, I bet that is the plan; I would even put a token amount of money on it.

I mean that would make sense. I suspect Kodak gets the loan to save their board for a few more months. Dicks around. Claims that film chemicals and pharmaceutical chemicals are the same, as they already have. Makes like one shitty run of chemicals. The FDA laughs. Then Kodak blunders to the next idea. This is the same company that ineptly tried to pivot into cryptocurrency and monetizing the blockchain a few years back and fell flat on their face.

They only got the loan because they told the administration what it wanted to hear. They aren’t even making medicines. They are making the stuff to make medicines. What’s the point is that still all goes overseas to get finished?

Nothing shady at all. Nope. Heads of companies routinely load up on stock options days before the stock price skyrockets.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/31/b...k-options.html

[Mach1]

They didn't build that someone did it for them.

[steelreserve]

Meanwhile, those poor souls in Sweden who foolishly refused drastic lockdowns are now paying for their bravado, to the tune of almost zero new deaths:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...w-cases-plunge

The Netherlands, which is full of wise Europeans infinitely smarter than us incompetent American redneck mouth-breathers, deems it not important enough to require facemasks in public:

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/art...masks-minister


The rest of the world is laughing at us. They are laughing at us because they have come to their senses and learned to ignore the coronavirus and treat it like any other ordinary disease, because that's precisely what it is. Meanwhile, Americans continue to be held hostage by self-important dipshit politicians and their histrionics. THAT is the real failure of government response.

[Mojouw]

Meanwhile, those poor souls in Sweden who foolishly refused drastic lockdowns are now paying for their bravado, to the tune of almost zero new deaths:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...w-cases-plunge

The Netherlands, which is full of wise Europeans infinitely smarter than us incompetent American redneck mouth-breathers, deems it not important enough to require facemasks in public:

www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-07-29/dutch-government-will-not-advise-public-to-wear-masks-minister


The rest of the world is laughing at us. They are laughing at us because they have come to their senses and learned to ignore the coronavirus and treat it like any other ordinary disease, because that's precisely what it is. Meanwhile, Americans continue to be held hostage by self-important dipshit politicians and their histrionics. THAT is the real failure of government response.

The interesting thing is that this table (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality) has the deaths per 100K at 47 for the US and 56 for Sweden. So no lockdown and roughly 10 more people per 100K die (works out to around 328 thousand, so Riverside, California ceases to exist) - is the response different? Is the economic impact different?

This source says it is a push at best:https://www.businessinsider.com/swed...in-data-2020-7
This one says it did improve corporate credit, which may lead to a less severe downturn: https://www.ft.com/content/0460efd0-...e-14a05237ec6a

So Riverside California for an uptick in corporate credit rating? Again, not attempting to disabuse anything that was posted, but I wonder how this changes depending on the framing of the question?

Because the same sources indicate that just under 330K people are alive right now because of social distancing and lock-downs. Trade those people for what? Because that is what I don't see; the tangible real world trade-off.

[steelreserve]

The interesting thing is that this table (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality) has the deaths per 100K at 47 for the US and 56 for Sweden. So no lockdown and roughly 10 more people per 100K die (works out to around 328 thousand, so Riverside, California ceases to exist) - is the response different? Is the economic impact different?

This source says it is a push at best:https://www.businessinsider.com/swed...in-data-2020-7
This one says it did improve corporate credit, which may lead to a less severe downturn: https://www.ft.com/content/0460efd0-...e-14a05237ec6a

So Riverside California for an uptick in corporate credit rating? Again, not attempting to disabuse anything that was posted, but I wonder how this changes depending on the framing of the question?

Because the same sources indicate that just under 330K people are alive right now because of social distancing and lock-downs. Trade those people for what? Because that is what I don't see; the tangible real world trade-off.

Check your math, you are off by a factor of 10.

Then again, this entire manufactured crisis is about poor senses of scale, so it's not surprising.

[Mojouw]

Check your math, you are off by a factor of 10.

Then again, this entire manufactured crisis is about poor senses of scale, so it's not surprising.

I just logged on to acknowledge that.

Still trade 30K people for what gain?

[steelreserve]

I just logged on to acknowledge that.

Still trade 30K people for what gain?

Yes, it would absolutely be worth trading 30k people, most of whom were near death anyway, so that the entire country did not have to be under house arrest for five months, which will probably turn into a full year in most places. It is not even close.

Now go calculate 30,000 as a percentage of 330 million. I'll wait.

[Mojouw]

Yes, it would absolutely be worth trading 30k people, most of whom were near death anyway, so that the entire country did not have to be under house arrest for five months, which will probably turn into a full year in most places. It is not even close.

Now go calculate 30,000 as a percentage of 330 million. I'll wait.

But if the lockdown saves 30K and no lockdown is a wash economically due to depressed demand and shaken consumer confidence (what seems to have happened in Sweden); what did you gain by adding even a fractional point to the death toll?

[vader29]

[steelreserve]

But if the lockdown saves 30K and no lockdown is a wash economically due to depressed demand and shaken consumer confidence (what seems to have happened in Sweden); what did you gain by adding even a fractional point to the death toll?

For starters, my own freedom. You may feel differently, but that is not something l value at zero because there is not a specific cash price attached to it. Just because you will readily give yours away for free does not mean it is worthless, or that other people should be willing to do the same. By the end of this, we will all have been forced to waste at least 1% of our expected lifespans over this shit. So recovering that alone would be a 10,000-to-1 payoff.

Second, you would indeed regain the economy, consumer confidence, and millions of jobs. Here is how this works: You say the lockdowns didn't cause depressed consumer activity, fear did. Ok, dubious as that is, let's assume it's true.

What caused the fear? Lockdowns. No, really. If they were not the only cause, they were a huge part in amplifying it. The ongoing lockdowns (and the continuing overblown response in general) are a huge reason why some people continue to be afraid, even though all available evidence suggests this is only cause for minor concern for most. Life is disrupted, and it makes people uneasy. Panic begets panic. So here we are, still cowering in fear over our own shadow.

Now, with no lockdown, what happens? Whether you lifted it now or never had it in the first place. People get a taste of things working as normal, and pretty soon they see nothing bad is actually happening. They figure it out. Then it goes back to normal. If you don't let people see life-as-usual with nothing bad happening, then they stay scared. You'll notice that the entire premise for a second lockdown, for a pivot from deaths deaths deaths to cases cases cases, and for additional actions that will serve to demoralize and exasperate, was baked into the narrative very early on, back in March and April. It is disgusting. Every step of the way, there is some shithead screaming in our ears, doing anything in his power not to allow us out from under our own fear. Every time the ship starts to right itself, they jump up and down until it capsizes again. It desperately wants to right itself; that is the natural state of things, but for these idiots who won't leave it alone.

The best part is, the entire basis for your argument about the economic collapse being caused by natural fear, not the lockdowns, is that it even contradicts itself. If I say the lockdowns were unnecessary, you say ok, well the same economic collapse still would have happened. But if the lockdowns were unnecessary, then there would have been little to be afraid of. People would have seen that. Or do you think we'd all still be voluntarily cowering in our homes five months later, after seeing the results for ourselves.

All those people your side keeps cursing out for ignoring lockdowns and mask orders, in apparently such large numbers that they are ruining everything for the rest of us - they're afraid, right? If nobody was forcing this on them, they'd stay the hell away from the bars and restaurants (which are universally packed as soon as they're allowed to open) and be good fearful citizens who hashtag stay the fuck home, right?

Or is it just that the fearmongers are so self-important that they think nothing will function normally unless THEY are participating in it, after THEY have deemed it fit that it shall be allowed to happen. That we should all be miserable together until their stupid little cult says it's ok, and eventually we'll come to understand this was all the fault of that notorious bogeyman Emmanuel Goldstein - er, we mean, Donald Trump. I guess in that light, it's no surprise why it's almost entirely people of a certain political affiliation that insist on continuing to defend this horseshit.

[tom444]

Dictionary

self·ish

adjective: selfish

• (of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.
  "I joined them for selfish reasons"
  
  
  Similar:
  
  
  
  egocentric
  
  egotistical
  
  self-centered
  
  self-regarding
  
  self-absorbed
  
  self-obsessed
  
  self-seeking
  
  self-serving
  
  inward-looking
  
  introverted
  
  inconsiderate
  
  thoughtless
  
  unthinking
  
  uncaring
  
  heedless
  
  unmindful
  
  regardless
  
  insensitive
  
  tactless
  
  uncharitable
  
  unkind
  
  mean
  
  miserly
  
  grasping
  
  greedy
  
  mercenary
  
  money-grubbing
  
  acquisitive
  
  opportunistic

[Mojouw]

For starters, my own freedom. You may feel differently, but that is not something l value at zero because there is not a specific cash price attached to it. Just because you will readily give yours away for free does not mean it is worthless, or that other people should be willing to do the same. By the end of this, we will all have been forced to waste at least 1% of our expected lifespans over this shit. So recovering that alone would be a 10,000-to-1 payoff.

Second, you would indeed regain the economy, consumer confidence, and millions of jobs. Here is how this works: You say the lockdowns didn't cause depressed consumer activity, fear did. Ok, dubious as that is, let's assume it's true.

What caused the fear? Lockdowns. No, really. If they were not the only cause, they were a huge part in amplifying it. The ongoing lockdowns (and the continuing overblown response in general) are a huge reason why some people continue to be afraid, even though all available evidence suggests this is only cause for minor concern for most. Life is disrupted, and it makes people uneasy. Panic begets panic. So here we are, still cowering in fear over our own shadow.

Now, with no lockdown, what happens? Whether you lifted it now or never had it in the first place. People get a taste of things working as normal, and pretty soon they see nothing bad is actually happening. They figure it out. Then it goes back to normal. If you don't let people see life-as-usual with nothing bad happening, then they stay scared. You'll notice that the entire premise for a second lockdown, for a pivot from deaths deaths deaths to cases cases cases, and for additional actions that will serve to demoralize and exasperate, was baked into the narrative very early on, back in March and April. It is disgusting. Every step of the way, there is some shithead screaming in our ears, doing anything in his power not to allow us out from under our own fear. Every time the ship starts to right itself, they jump up and down until it capsizes again. It desperately wants to right itself; that is the natural state of things, but for these idiots who won't leave it alone.

The best part is, the entire basis for your argument about the economic collapse being caused by natural fear, not the lockdowns, is that it even contradicts itself. If I say the lockdowns were unnecessary, you say ok, well the same economic collapse still would have happened. But if the lockdowns were unnecessary, then there would have been little to be afraid of. People would have seen that. Or do you think we'd all still be voluntarily cowering in our homes five months later, after seeing the results for ourselves.

All those people your side keeps cursing out for ignoring lockdowns and mask orders, in apparently such large numbers that they are ruining everything for the rest of us - they're afraid, right? If nobody was forcing this on them, they'd stay the hell away from the bars and restaurants (which are universally packed as soon as they're allowed to open) and be good fearful citizens who hashtag stay the fuck home, right?

Or is it just that the fearmongers are so self-important that they think nothing will function normally unless THEY are participating in it, after THEY have deemed it fit that it shall be allowed to happen. That we should all be miserable together until their stupid little cult says it's ok, and eventually we'll come to understand this was all the fault of that notorious bogeyman Emmanuel Goldstein - er, we mean, Donald Trump. I guess in that light, it's no surprise why it's almost entirely people of a certain political affiliation that insist on continuing to defend this horseshit.

That’s a solid answer.

We aren’t going to agree on the specifics because we are both starting from very opposite philosophical poles. That’s not a problem.

I don’t agree with the insidious motivations you are laying out. Doesn’t mean I’m right. I just don’t see it that way.

I do strongly think that lockdown or not; all you’d need to devastate consumer confidence and demand is just introduce a virus with no clear treatment.

[tom444]

That’s a solid answer.

Come on, it's complete BS.

[Mojouw]

Come on, it's complete BS.

You and I may think it is. And we can cobble together a long laundry lists of counters. But I gotta walk what I’ve been talking.

It’s a full accounting of a coherent political response to the current scenario. That’s all I asked for and whether I, or anyone else, disagrees with it doesn’t really matter. Dude offered a coherent position statement that articulates a specific point of view. Personally, I don’t get it or see it the same way. But, I can’t just point and laugh.

[tom444]

But, I can’t just point and laugh.

I'm not laughing, I'm shaking my head that in a sovereign state that has a developed economy and advanced technological infrastructure there are people who believe that kind of thing.

[Mojouw]

I'm not laughing, I'm shaking my head that in a sovereign state that has a developed economy and advanced technological infrastructure there are people who believe that kind of thing.

Sure. But that’s why we have elections and stuff. I’m well aware that like 98% of this message board reads anything I post and just shakes their head and recoils in abject horror.

[Mach1]

Sure. But that’s why we have elections and stuff. I’m well aware that like 98% of this message board reads anything I post and just shakes their head and recoils in abject horror.

There's a reason for that.

[tom444]

Sure. But that’s why we have elections and stuff. I’m well aware that like 98% of this message board reads anything I post and just shakes their head and recoils in abject horror.

Well, that's their problem. But when things get dicey people like steelreserve and Trump are everybody's problem.

Get your shears ready.

[cold-hard-steel]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb...zTr?li=BBnb7Kz

[steelreserve]

Well, that's their problem. But when things get dicey people like steelreserve and Trump are everybody's problem.

Get your shears ready.

Things are dicey now, and it is because people like you have found a way to force everyone else to live inside their liberal fantasy shitworld. Everybody hates you for it.

But yes, it is everyone else's fault for these things that you did. You're the good guys.

Causing problems and then projecting blame: Another part of liberals' bread and butter. Now don't forget your back-to-school shopping; classes start in a few weeks, kiddo.

[Mojouw]

Things are dicey now, and it is because people like you have found a way to force everyone else to live inside their liberal fantasy shitworld. Everybody hates you for it.

But yes, it is everyone else's fault for these things that you did. You're the good guys.

Causing problems and then projecting blame: Another part of liberals' bread and butter. Now don't forget your back-to-school shopping; classes start in a few weeks, kiddo.

And this is the part that is ridiculous. The assumption that you're POV is the majority. There is a great deal of data to indicate that it isn't. At best the country is split in half.

BUT...BUT...everyone I know thinks like I do. Look at this message board, MojoUW and Tom are the only ones who disagree with me. And those guys suck!

Cool! Sample size? Selection bias? I mean, outside of this message board, I don't interact with anyone who would agree with a word of what you're saying. Does that mean you are the minority POV?

I am repeatedly told I am an intolerant liberal seeking to browbeat everyone into agreement with my warped POV and political philosophies. That I need to realize that few people agree with my worldview and that I better back off and get on board with how things work. But, at every damn turn in the road, the other side angrily screams that they don't have to even countenance that there are other points of view and millions of people who agree with those points of view. They can just reject that POV and its adherents as radicals, sheep, fools, evil, or whatever allows them to marginalize and ridicule it.

Honestly, that is why I post incessantly and annoyingly on this side of the board. It is total bullshit that one side is allowed to assume the fundamental righteousness and correctness of everything and anything they advocate for and the other is held to a totally different standard and asked to assume they are wrong and the opposition is correct. Why do I have to start with the idea that whatever conservatives or libertarians believe is the fundamental unchanging fabric of America and what it means to be American while liberals are evil agents seeking to destroy those concepts?

[Born2Steel]

Article with some actual impact numbers on the NFL thus far.

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/07/...y-coronavirus/