The management of Conavirus (discussion)

[Vendrah]

Thread to do any observations, complains and compliment about what authorities have been doing and handling on Coronavirus, including country data comparisons (or complains if they are being manipulated), and discussions related to that.

[MENTION=5159]Lexicon[/MENTION] [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] can move part of the discussion on Corona topic for this thread rather than Off Topic posts.

EDIT: This was originally [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] suggestion

 

[Coriolis]

Thread to do any observations, complains and compliment about what authorities have been doing and handling on Coronavirus, including country data comparisons (or complains if they are being manipulated), and discussions related to that.

[MENTION=5159]Lexicon[/MENTION] [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] can move part of the discussion on Corona topic for this thread rather than Off Topic posts.

EDIT: This was originally [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION] suggestion

I am not sure exactly where or how you would like the existing thread split. Discussion of how authorities are handling the situation is well within the scope of that thread. Can you, or [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION], or any one else so inclined be a bit more specific about how you would want the topic divided?

 

[Vendrah]

I am not sure exactly where or how you would like the existing thread split. Discussion of how authorities are handling the situation is well within the scope of that thread. Can you, or [MENTION=7842]Z Buck McFate[/MENTION], or any one else so inclined be a bit more specific about how you would want the topic divided?

The thread turn into a "Trump" talk, basically.
At least that was Z Buck McFate and isoprene point of view, I think, and I just decided to create the thread by initiative.

 

[Coriolis]

The thread turn into a "Trump" talk, basically.
At least that was Z Buck McFate and isoprene point of view, I think, and I just decided to create the thread by initiative.

Your OP mentions "observations, complains and compliment about what authorities have been doing and handling on Coronavirus, including country data comparisons". This includes far more than Trump and what is going on in the US. Are you suggesting we split out only those posts discussing the US response, which necessarily will include any actions taken by our president and his administration? Trying to separate the actions of Trump from those of other US officials would be difficult. Given the global nature of the pandemic, even separating out US response would he difficult, given how many posts compare what is going on in different nations.

 

[Vendrah]

Your OP mentions "observations, complains and compliment about what authorities have been doing and handling on Coronavirus, including country data comparisons". This includes far more than Trump and what is going on in the US. Are you suggesting we split out only those posts discussing the US response, which necessarily will include any actions taken by our president and his administration? Trying to separate the actions of Trump from those of other US officials would be difficult. Given the global nature of the pandemic, even separating out US response would he difficult, given how many posts compare what is going on in different nations.

I dont think you are wrong, but just for the sake of exposing their point of view that I am regretting endorsing, the suggestion would be to make a thread discussing the authorities actions from the past, present and future, authorities in general. That topic became a really big discussion about Trump instead of Corona, that was the reason it seemed like a derail. Well, we can wait for Z for clarification.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

If no one back there has been following the thread much (and therefore have no more of an idea about how much to move than I do) then I imagine it'd suffice to leave ceecee's post here to start. It provides a link to that thread, so the previous posts will be somewhat attached.

You mean like 70 days worth of doing absolute nothing? You mean 2+ months of getting this shithead to stop saying its a hoax? That kind of inflated bureaucracy?

Trump Admin Lost 70 Days That Could Have Saved Thousands of Lives From COVID-19, WaPo Reports

That's not the kind of bureaucracy the US has. Or should I say - had. The US was very prepared to deal with something like this at one time. When FEMA was an independent agency. When there was not Department of Homeland Security to get in the way of everything and everyone and fuck up everything. But this pandemic under this administration, that stood there and did nothing. I think you can find a better phrase for it than "inflated bureaucracies".

DHS wound down pandemic models before coronavirus struck - POLITICO

US border agencies were unprepared to contain coronavirus — Quartz

Coronavirus Outbreak: A Cascade of Warnings, Heard but Unheeded - The New York Times

But it's still OrAnGeMaNbAd, not a scrap of accountability demanded by his followers, at all, for anything.

 

[á´…eparted]

There is an essential lens that all of this must be viewed from in order to see a sense of rationality into the actions of the Trump administration and the GOP at large.

Russia. Russia has infected the GOP for decades. One only needs to look at Dana Rohrabacher to see the timelength this goes back. It wasn't until around 2010 that this started to become tangibly significant. Russia's entire goal is to destroy the US, and western democracy in general (why is up for some discussion, but here it doesn't matter much). Classical groundwars really aren't that feasible anymore for a variety of reasons, and Russia figured out that in many cases there's a far better method. Have the country destroy itself from the inside out. Exploit weaknesses in government and subsequently break apart that infrasturucture. The resulting power vacuums will be filled with individuals who will lead authoratarian regimes (as is what almost always happens in that situation) and the country will be severely weakened for decades if not permanently. Russia's goal was and is simple: find ways to influence leaders who will break apart the governement.

If you look at the GOP and the Trump admin from the context that Russia wants our country to be destroyed, it makes perfect sense as to why nearly all of them make steps and actions that seem almost perfectly fit to be actively destructive and harmful.

This is precisely why the pandemic management has been so bad and leaders at the throne are seeming to make the most destructive and damaging moves possible: it will lead to the US's collapse, exactly what Russia wants.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

From PBS Newshour, a couple days ago:

Judy Woodruff:

And, David, what's your assessment of the president? He is holding these daily briefings, which sometimes run two, two-and-a-half-hours.

And now he is talking about announcing next week what he's calling a get back to — an opening up commission, open the country up council, if you will.

Is this what the country needs to hear at this point?

David Brooks:

I think it is, actually. We need to know what phase two is. We know we're going to hunker down for a while. We have got to know what the world is going to look like when we come out of this.

And there are no good plans out there. The plans that are circulating — there are a lot of private plans — they tend to focus on massive amounts of testing, way more tests than we have right now, and then tracing, where you have an app on your phone, and somebody, the government, I don't know who, Bill Gates, could — would track where you go, who you came into contact with, and you — if you contacted somebody with the virus, then they would like you know, and you would self-isolate.

That is — that kind of pulling out of this is incredibly daunting, but it's something we're going to have to figure out as we slowly emerge from this.

And so I'm glad the president's setting up this committee. The problem is — as I have been told, is that everybody on that committee has to be 100 percent loyal. And so if you said anything nasty about Donald Trump, you don't qualify for the committee.

And that basically guarantees a very low level of competence from that committee. The North Korean-style loyalty tests are going to be crushing to the competence of any effort going forward.
​

That^ pretty much goes without saying.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

And, Fauci confirms New York Times report Trump rebuffed social distancing advice

Prominent US public health adviser Dr Anthony Fauci appeared on Sunday to confirm a bombshell New York Times report which said he and other Trump administration officials recommended the implementation of physical distancing to combat the coronavirus in February, but were rebuffed for almost a month.
​

Seems a safe assumption that Fauci will be fired now.

 

[ygolo]

Text - H.Res.917 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should withhold the contribution of Federal funds to the World Health Organization until Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus resigns and an international commission to investigate the World Health Organization is established. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

 

[ceecee]

Lobbyists Made Sure This Crucial Protection Was Left Out of COVID-19 Bill

dark money group called Doctor Patient Unity—later revealed to be funded by private equity firms—spent tens of millions of dollars on an ad blitz attacking surprise billing reforms, employing alarming visuals like darkened emergency rooms to suggest the bill would seriously curtail access to health care.

More on Doctor Patient Unity...

Secretive front group targets vulnerable senators with $2.3M ad blitz over surprise medical bills fight

Physician staffing groups are behind the surprise medical bills ad blitz - Axios


One more reason to consider sending representatives back to their home districts, permanently. Much less access for these garbage human lobbyists and their hedge fund/VC backers.

 

[Coriolis]

The other mods don't see a good way to split the original thread either, including Lexicon who went through the entire thread post by post, so we will leave it as is. Members are welcome to continue posting in either thread. It would help to clarify what is considered on-topic for each thread. If parallel discussions start happening, we may end up having to merge the threads back together.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

It would help to clarify what is considered on-topic for each thread. If parallel discussions start happening, we may end up having to merge the threads back together.

Beyond the distinctions made in the op?

There was whining in the other thread about political tangents. I can understand the desire to read about and discuss the progression of the virus without being bombarded by challenging political beliefs. That other thread did seem to at least start with the goal of being solely about the progression of the virus. At the same time, having a POTUS that (for example) actually doles out supplies and assistance to states according to how much the respective governors fellate his ego and enable his authoritarian control of the country - while admittedly somewhat of a side tangent - makes it difficult to discuss the progression of the virus without whining about the role the current administration has played and continues to play.

I can see a distinct difference between the two topics. But if the threads end up being merged, at least then I can ignore all the requests to leave politics out of it and participate with abandon knowing I tried to make it a separate discussion.

eta: I do see how there's an unavoidable overlap. For example: the stats regarding covid deaths aren't entirely accurate because we don't have the tests or manpower to confirm the existence of coronavirus in all deaths. People who believe that 45's administration is intentionally slacking in this regard (with an unprecedented and pronounced lack of integrity, to manipulate the numbers) are going to butt heads with people who think 45 is doing the same thing any leader in that position would do. Both sides think the other is delusional. And the truth is that we don't have enough tests to prove definitively who is more correct, so arguments must be built indirectly - which is typically where things veer distinctly off track from strictly the progression of the virus. And in my mind, there's a distinct difference between wanting to simply list what the stats are (with perhaps a succinct disclaimer about how/why they might not be accurate) and wanting to delve into the whys and wherefores of how a corrupt administration is manipulating the numbers.

 

[Coriolis]

Beyond the distinctions made in the op?

There was whining in the other thread about political tangents. I can understand the desire to read about and discuss the progression of the virus without being bombarded by challenging political beliefs. That other thread did seem to at least start with the goal of being solely about the progression of the virus. At the same time, having a POTUS that (for example) actually doles out supplies and assistance to states according to how much the respective governors fellate his ego and enable his authoritarian control of the country - while admittedly somewhat of a side tangent - makes it difficult to discuss the progression of the virus without whining about the role the current administration has played and continues to play.

I can see a distinct difference between the two topics. But if the threads end up being merged, at least then I can ignore all the requests to leave politics out of it and participate with abandon knowing I tried to make it a separate discussion.

eta: I do see how there's an unavoidable overlap. For example: the stats regarding covid deaths aren't entirely accurate because we don't have the tests or manpower to confirm the existence of coronavirus in all deaths. People who believe that 45's administration is intentionally slacking in this regard (with an unprecedented and pronounced lack of integrity, to manipulate the numbers) are going to butt heads with people who think 45 is doing the same thing any leader in that position would do. Both sides think the other is delusional. And the truth is that we don't have enough tests to prove definitively who is more correct, so arguments must be built indirectly - which is typically where things veer distinctly off track from strictly the progression of the virus. And in my mind, there's a distinct difference between wanting to simply list what the stats are (with perhaps a succinct disclaimer about how/why they might not be accurate) and wanting to delve into the whys and wherefores of how a corrupt administration is manipulating the numbers.

The last line of the other thread's OP: "Anyway, it should become a very major news item for while, so it is good to have a separate thread on it. " suggests that thread was meant as a catchall for discussion on this issue, but it wouldn't be the first time that a thread has become unwieldy and was split along topical lines. If members prefer to keep (as I understand the split) the policy discussion here, and the medical discussion in the other thread, nothing wrong with that. We can always revisit that later.

For the record, political discussion was always on-topic in the other thread, as long as it remained related to COVID-19 and related policy, media attention, etc. As always, bickering, insults, baiting, etc. are not appropriate. To that we have added unsound medical information, as summarized by Lexicon after the thread cleanup. As long as both threads adhere to these guidelines, all should be good.

 

[ceecee]

Tax change in coronavirus package overwhelmingly benefits millionaires, Congressional body finds - San Antonio Express-News

More than 80% of the benefits of a tax change tucked into the coronavirus relief package Congress passed last month will go to those who earn more than $1 million annually, according to a report by a nonpartisan congressional body expected to be released Tuesday.

The provision, inserted into the legislation by Senate Republicans, temporarily suspends a limitation on how much owners of businesses formed as "pass-through" entities can deduct against their nonbusiness income, such as capital gains, to reduce their tax liability. The limitation was created as part of the 2017 Republican tax law to offset other tax cuts to firms in that legislation.

lol

 

[Z Buck McFate]

In unprecedented move, Treasury orders Trump’s name printed on stimulus checks

The Treasury Department has ordered President Trump’s name be printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that is expected to slow their delivery by several days, senior agency officials said.

[...]

It will be the first time a president’s name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one.
​

eta: “'President Donald J. Trump' will appear on the left side of the payment."

Is it possible to sign a check over to a presidential campaign? It would be pretty funny to see a Twitter trend of images of people donating their checks to the Biden campaign. With some tagline making it clear it's a direct consequence of insisting his name get printed on them.

 

[ceecee]

In unprecedented move, Treasury orders Trump’s name printed on stimulus checks

The Treasury Department has ordered President Trump’s name be printed on stimulus checks the Internal Revenue Service is rushing to send to tens of millions of Americans, a process that is expected to slow their delivery by several days, senior agency officials said.

[...]

It will be the first time a president’s name appears on an IRS disbursement, whether a routine refund or one of the handful of checks the government has issued to taxpayers in recent decades either to stimulate a down economy or share the dividends of a strong one.
​

eta: “'President Donald J. Trump' will appear on the left side of the payment."

Is it possible to sign a check over to a presidential campaign? It would be pretty funny to see a Twitter trend of images of people donating their checks to the Biden campaign. With some tagline making it clear it's a direct consequence of insisting his name get printed on them.

It's so ridiculous as most people have direct deposits set up for their tax refund, those will be used for this stimulus. What it will do is slow down getting checks to people who really need them but Trump fans will applaud and think is just part of him - doing a good job.

I truly cannot wait for the first real whiff of lefty populist anything (they think that was Bernie lol). The right's brain rot will be total and all encompassing - it's just going to seep out their ears.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

What it will do is slow down getting checks to people who really need them...

Yeah, this is the part that's deplorable - it's most likely the poorest and the elderly who will have to wait a few extra days for the check, and there's no way around the fact this is to feed his insatiable ego.

I still take some cold comfort in the fact that, a couple years ago, they actually had to Photoshop the big gold "TRUMP" off the side of his building here in Chicago to advertise empty office space inside, because they were having so much trouble leasing the space out. It's been considered a super tacky blight of an eyesore since the day he put it there, and one day Chicagoans will cheer like crazy when it finally comes down.

 

[Red Memories]

honestly I'm a little upset that I actually got money, me, I had taxes from the job I had. And my grandpa and mother (my mother is disabled on SSI and my grandpa is retired and gets his SSI) both do not have their money yet. and I am hearing more about how the IRS is screwing this up and I just feel bad for those who truly need this. I hope you all get it soon.

 

[ceecee]

Banks Took Billions In Fees To Process Small Business Loans Amid Pandemic Crisis : NPR

Banks handling the government's $349 billion loan program for small businesses made more than $10 billion in fees — even as tens of thousands of small businesses were shut out of the program, according to an analysis of financial records by NPR.

The banks took in the fees while processing loans that required less vetting than regular bank loans and had little risk for the banks, the records show. Taxpayers provided the money for the loans, which were guaranteed by the Small Business Administration.