southpaw

So during an emerging pandemic you chose to go to a hockey game while sick? I believe others have provided different definitions of the word idiot, but would certainly fit. We were told on March 6th that "anybody that wants a test can get a test. That’s what the bottom line is." When that was obviously a lie, we were then told that "There’s 10 million tests that are in the market now, with 17 million more coming by the end of the month (March).” Also a lie. Excuse me if I don't believe everything that is said by the mouthpiece of the lackluster response. I'm just curious how this desire to reopen the country as soon as possible coincides with the new closure on immigration. I assume Mafiaman will be the first in line to pick up the need for farming or factory jobs.

I intentionally chose to use a Fox News poll, as I assumed it would be better received by some here. Here's an NBC/Wall Street Joural poll that was released yesterday (was conductedfrom 13th-15th of April): https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6842659-200203-NBCWSJ-April-Poll-4-19-20-Release.html

I would consider the 80% of people who are in favor of the national stay-at-home order for non-essential employees as part of the average American.

Shhhhh, don't tell anyone where that first set of statistics came from.

They said probably. I know this is difficult, fourth grade stuff, but here's pretty, moving pictures to explain: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/ping-pong-ball-video-social-distancing-coronavirus-mouse-traps-psa-covid-19-a9461746.html?jwsource=cl

Thankfully, the virus also doesn't transmit from the under 44 to the over 44. Remember folks, it's better to have coronavirus than the flu says our medical expert. How many hospital beds do the under 44 need and take from the over 44? How many systems get overwhelmed because the olds have to die to keep the economy going.

!@#$ those people over 44, amirite?

Here's the thing... while you may not care about deaths of people over 45 years of age, I do. Would some of the people with pre-existing conditions over 65 die in the next year? Absolutely. Would this many of them? No, so why do we only care about people under 45? Below is one of the many posts where you said this wasn't the flu and that people under the age of 60 shouldn't be worried. Do you believe that's still the case? As I asked, but you didn't answer, why did you change your numbers to just people under 45? Because now, the numbers are showing that 25% of people who test positive in NYC, aged 45-64 have a 27% chance of ending up in the hospital. Could it be because someone aged 44-64 is 8 times more likely to die from Coronavirus? Give me 1, although there are none, just 1 cause of death in NYC that has resulted in more deaths than coronavirus in the past 3 months. Please quote where someone has said they are comfortable to keep the current lockdown measures in place until fall or through the year. There's a massive difference between that strawman and keeping the current lockdown in place for more than another week.

I was curious why all of sudden you're only concerned about cases for people under 45. A couple of weeks ago, you were touting numbers for people under 65.

And if we only select people who have the letter P in their last name, that's basically like 3 people. That many people died yesterday from eating ice cream too fast and their brain literally froze. Clearly, these stats show coronavirus isn't a problem.

That's what can happen when the country shuts down, people stay home, and businesses receive the financial support they need to keep everyone employed. Even freelancers or self employed people are receiving significant financial help due to loss of business. Germany has handled this about as well as possible and we are already seeing the results as some public places are opening up again.

If you're more concerned about the people that might scam the system vs the people that need the financial support, you need to figure out your priorities.

My apologies. Lots of people become defecit hawks at interesting times.

Why are you suddenly concerned about the defecit? It's been rising since 2017.

Here's a hint... there is no "would be." He already is the laughingstock of the world.

I agree it was a stupid segment and him and his guest were dumb. It happened more than a month ago, so I'm curious why it matters? A few weeks ago you posted it in an attempt to rebut open racists, sexists and xenophobes at a Trump rally.

The last I had read, it wasn't settled. But I see now they're not getting bailed out.

Not being able to do quick math on live TV isn't the worst offense there is. Stupid, yes but there's lots of stupid people who are good at talking on TV. And I agree the Kennedy Center shouldn't have recieved that extra funding.

Why are there only two options? Why do we just accept horribly run companies as necessary? Why do we need to bail out airline companies a decade after doing it last time? Because they took advantage of the help offered. It was "me first" to them and their shareholders. The cruise companies that flag their ships outside of the US to avoid paying US taxes don't deserve a bailout to keep them afloat.

Fortunately, there are plenty of other ways to provide for people in a time like this and none of them involve billion dollar payouts to companies that have shown they don't care about their employees. It's incredible how predictable the responses from the Fox news watching contingent are.

The next decade? That's cute. Stop acting like a couple months is forever. I'm mocking the $1,200 because it's a one time payment that doesn't even cover rent or mortgage for a lot of people. It should be more and it should be regular until stores and restaurants are open again.

It's very telling that your first reaction is to claim people are going to abuse the system. The true American way... me first. You know there are requirements to collect unemployment? Those wouldn't disappear. Just as the $600 a week isn't forever, neither world additional monetary support. I can imagine this scenario playing out "I'm sorry sir, you'll have to accept just a fraction of your salary, despite losing your job through no fault of your own. But there's someone who normally makes $13 an hour and under this system, they'd actually make $14. So instead, we will screw everyone else. " Remember, the boogeyman is just a story, not everyday life.

What you call entitlements, I call support for people who lost their job due to no fault of their own. I know who pushed through the $600 and that's the point. Without them, there would have been nothing extra as evidence by those officials saying the extra should be taken away. It's still not enough but that's how compromise works these days.

Curious if Perunovich had been suspended for that horrible hit from behind, if that would have affected voting. That was textbook suspension worthy in the NCHC.

No, I want Americans to start realizing significant changes to the entire system need to be made. In 2009-10, 12,500 people died in the U.S. from H1N1. What did we learn from that? Clearly nothing, as that many people have died from Covid in the last week. When there needs to be a swift response, many people were lazy to react and the models bore that out. Now that most states are on board, we are going to see those effects in a couple of weeks. The ones that acted quickly are already seeing their numbers flatten. The US system isn't designed to care for the average worker. MM loses his job, and that sucks, but what support does he have when that happens? The government shut things down, so the government should provide for those impacted. We are all going to get a $1,200 check. Those who lost their jobs will get unemployment and an extra $600 per week. How can the often self-proclaimed "greatest country in the world" only manage to help Americans with a tiny sum of financial support? The small businesses that have had to lay off employees and may not survive this, are getting road blocks left and right. Corporations that spent millions using the 2008 bailouts to buy back their stock are getting bailed out again, because why? Do we really need to save another horribly run airline that overcharges customers yet gives executives multi-million dollar bonuses each year? There are thousands of people in Texas trying to get food, while farmers in Wisconsin are dumping out milk because they can't sell it. In what world does that make sense? Only in one where it's always "me first," whether that's an individual who won't bother to stay at home because of "freedom," or a company that lays off thousands of employees because you gotta keep those shareholders happy and you can't dare lose money for a quarter or two, to the politicians who would rather give handouts to the companies that donated to their campaigns than the people that actually do the voting, to the President who is more concerned about the Stock Market and the ratings of his daily pressers than saving the lives of Americans.