The Coronavirus, not the beer

Also a good opportunity to bring back some of the classics.

aiEJH.gif
 
Yes because it allowed their citizens to be adults. End of discussion from my end.

If you're telling me though at the start of this we KNEW that in 4 months a treatment was going to be available then sure its debatable.

You are missing the point. In determining whether a plan was good not, you have to look at the results. If a treatment or vaccine is developed quickly, and you didn't take action to slow the spread initially, you have a blood on your hands. This was always a possibility and would have had to be been factored into the decision not to lockdown.
 
Anyone that has been following and is being honest knows that the IFR is severely overstated because of terrible policy from Democratic governors.
 
You are missing the point. In determining whether a plan was good not, you have to look at the results. If a treatment or vaccine is developed quickly, and you didn't take action to slow the spread initially, you have a blood on your hands. This was always a possibility and would have had to be been factored into the decision not to lockdown.

I'm sorry sir. I believe you are missing the point.

You are using information unknown at the time to determine if a decision was the right course of action.

I'm sure every single government thought about treatments and their viability at the time of their decision.
 
I'm sorry sir. I believe you are missing the point.

You are using information unknown at the time to determine if a decision was the right course of action.

I'm sure every single government thought about treatments and their viability at the time of their decision.


That is irrelevant to whether it was a good decision or not. We judge decisions as good or bad based on the outcome.
 
That is irrelevant to whether it was a good decision or not. We judge decisions as good or bad based on the outcome.

And the outcome is that infections have plateaued (immunity wall) and the death rate per million when compared to the hardest hit parts of the world is fantastic.

Then there is the mental toll and economic toll and so on and so forth but those are challenging to quantify but are not included in your assessment.
 
More like premium porn.

Is it not a fair question?

Well I think if you want to evaluate governance in such a manner (and I wouldn't) a better metric would be per capita income of blue states such as new york versus per capita income of red states such as alabama. Non?

ze bottom line is ze bottom line

outcomes are outcomes until we no longer like what's on the scoreboard then we change the conversation
 
Well I think if you want to evaluate governance in such a manner (and I wouldn't) a better metric would be per capita income of blue states such as new york versus per capita income of red states such as alabama. Non?

ze bottom line is ze bottom line

This is what you call a non answer because the truth destroys your positions.
 
the truth according to thethe...hmmm...what a concept

I just want to make sure I'm clear here on your stance pertaining the issue of nursing home policy during the pandemic.

Was it good or bad?

Did it lead to more or less deaths?
 
I just want to make sure I'm clear here on your stance pertaining the issue of nursing home policy during the pandemic.

Was it good or bad?

Did it lead to more or less deaths?

many people (including me) recognize that we will have to re-examine conditions at nursing homes

i have good company in this.

"We see an increasing amount of cases in elderly homes and, of course, as we all know, that's the vulnerable part of the population, the part of the population that gets really ill and that's also where we have the mortality and that's a very unfortunate development."

“It is not a failure for the overall strategy, but it is a failure to protect our elderly who live in care homes.”
Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist of Sweden

Many places, including New York and Sweden, will have to learn from some tragic failings when it comes to protecting the elderly.
 
many people (including me) recognize that we will have to re-examine conditions at nursing homes

i have good company in this.

"We see an increasing amount of cases in elderly homes and, of course, as we all know, that's the vulnerable part of the population, the part of the population that gets really ill and that's also where we have the mortality and that's a very unfortunate development."

“It is not a failure for the overall strategy, but it is a failure to protect our elderly who live in care homes.”
Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist of Sweden

Many places, including New York and Sweden, will have to learn from some tragic failings when it comes to protecting the elderly.

So the answer to the questions are 'bad' and 'more'?
 
More like premium porn.

Is it not a fair question?

No. Ignoring the flaws in his actual analysis, the basic premise is flawed: Democrats being ****ty doesn't have anything to do with Trump's ****tiness. All politicians can be simultaneously ****ty to varying degrees.
 
Back
Top