Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Spending about the same amount of time researching as you did, and having personal experience in several of those states; I’d guess 80-90% of the referred-to violent criminals in those areas vote Democrat or have never voted.
  2. So this is something that Trump signed into law and was approved by a Republican led house then correct? Crazy how both sides come off as a dumpster fire. Yes. To be fair, iirc it was attached to the emergency budget bill the house sent to the senate to keep the government funded through December . The senate refused to pass the original Secure Act as written but when it was attached to the emergency budget it passed and was signed. To your point, the original opposition wasn’t to these specific aspects, but rather to the Senate asking for 529 money to be applicable to home schooling, which the house opposed, supposedly under pressure from the teacher lobby.
  3. Biden’s plan is to eliminate step-up basis on inheritance. It will effect everyone with non-qualified stock. Dad buys 1000 shares of Tesla in 2012, he dies, you pay taxes on over $1,000,000. With his proposal of treating capital gains as income, for some people you could be paying $380,000 federal taxes plus 3-7% state taxes on. At this point it’s unclear whether the death or the sale would be the tax trigger event. Same applies to your huge gain on Nvidia, Apple etc. Both 401s and IRAs are deferred, but in 2019 congress passed legislation to collect significantly more taxes from your inherited IRA by eliminating the stretch-rule. Prior, your dad dies, leaves 500k in the Ira. You are 45 so you get to stretch RMD taxable withdrawals over your lifetime based on your age, saving a ton in taxes. Now we must liquidate the IRA (which is often the product of the decedent’s 401k) and pay all the taxes in 10 years.
  4. The article explains boosted immune response to the new c-19 due to a lifetime of exposures to common corona viruses (229E etc) I assume that’s your point since it’s a form of herd immunity. In the current situation, herd immunity is generally used in terms of exposure to only c-19
  5. Is Hayduke the first tournament level troll this board has experienced? In two decades of dabbling on forums I’ve never seen so many repeatedly take the bait.
  6. Yeah I do, you don’t know anything about me, and you clearly don’t live in Philly.
  7. You realize how easy it is to send in the ballot of every family member in your household, your old mom’s house, your grandparents in the nursing home, and any family member who doesn’t care? I could literally vote three times in this election. Roughly knowing a family member’s signature is easy, and if it wasn’t I guarantee the election board isn’t going to toss it unless it’s an X. That being said, it’s all about which base is most motivated to “get out the vote”
  8. Let’s be fair. In the broader context, he answered a question truthfully. He didn’t bring it up. When asked if we could get to the point they would be recommended. "It might, if you really want perfect protection of the mucosal surfaces." "You have mucosa in the nose, mucosa in the mouth, but you also have mucosa in the eye," he continued. "Theoretically, you should protect all the mucosal surfaces.” He noted that goggles and eye or face shields are "not universally recommended".. "but if you really want to be complete, you should probably use it if you can."
  9. “Doc, I catch Covid when I shake hands then fiddle with my mask” Doc, “Don’t do that”
  10. Six degrees of Kevin Bacon. I believe in you; you can do better.
  11. True, I guess it matters what media someone uses. I see that pointed out repeatedly. It’s easy to see that the increased testing is on healthier people, therefore lower death rate. We know with therapeutics we are losing a lower % of the at-risk. But there two sets of stats, the at-risk, and everyone else. Despite better therapeutics a relatively large % of “at-risk” get sick as hell, so they aren’t eating out or going to sporting events, and we shouldn’t reasonably expect differently. For the most part, at-risk folks are retirees with money and time, and the economy be broken without them. It is what it is and it won’t change until a vaccine.
  12. From a decision making standpoint looking backward at deaths doesn’t really effect the math used for decision making. What matters is how many new positives we are getting today vs yesterday. I see your point with flaws in counting a positive twice inflates overall infections. But when this happens, pick any % of double dipping, the rate of transmission still doesn’t change appreciably as long as the error rate stays roughly the same. Modeling with large numbers will count those errors as noise, which it probably is in larger states. (Theoretically, a moderate non recurring double dip in a low population state could skew Rt for a few days but would push it the opposite direction a few days later) Not perfection but they are getting pretty good at considering what is important to interpret and how to do the math. Where we could/will see the “number of tests” skewing Rt data is if we start asking very large groups of asymptomatic people to test in a short period. Such as several universities testing entire student bodies in September.
  13. Too many variables at this point. Lack of kits, slowdown at some labs, most exposed don’t get tested at all because they already know the answer, or asymptomatic people who feel fine get tested anyway etc. It’s an algebraic equation with so many variables they are forced to go off large numbers. Every input is debatable. It’s clearly not perfect. Decision makers watch rate of transmission and hospitalizations in zones. https://rt.live
  • Create New...