2019-2020 Official Regular Season Thread

[bksballer89]

 

[shopson67]

You're missing my point. The more you shut people inside and take away their livelihood the more likely you see an uptick in alcoholism, opiod and drug abuse and depression/suicide.

So take Ohio that has had 400 deaths to Covid thus far...and again totally agree that number is thanks to SD and mitigation, what's the cost benefit analysis look like for shutting the economy down for let's say....three more months if we save....2000 lives? What if we lose 1000 more because of the above? A 1000 lives is a horrible thing regardless but this is our economy.

Take Vegas... it's forecasted that's 43.3 BILLION in economic loss to the country. That's with a B not an M.

The economy will rebound. I find it funny that everyone calls people that want to be safe and not break the lock downs too early as fear mongering, but claiming that the economy is going to tank otherwise isn't fear mongering.

The president focuses more on the economy because he ties his success rate to it. It's literally one of the few things he can point to as a success (and even that is only with a really wide angle lens). Plus, his "friends/backers" in the 1% require him to do so.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

The economy will rebound. I find it funny that everyone calls people that want to be safe and not break the lock downs too early as fear mongering, but claiming that the economy is going to tank otherwise isn't fear mongering.

The president focuses more on the economy because he ties his success rate to it. It's literally one of the few things he can point to as a success (and even that is only with a really wide angle lens). Plus, his "friends/backers" in the 1% require him to do so.

I'm not at all a Trump guy. Las Vegas casinos have as little as six months cash on hand expecting a small business to have that is insane. Most can't float this.

By no means am I saying open it all tomorrow but saying a garden store or a department store can't phase in and then bars/restaurants with limited capacity can't safely space people is silly.

If you're immune compromised or old maybe you still need to sit this one out. Each person needs to take responsibility for their own health. Even if a business opens they aren't the world police.

But again being that I am out in this daily despite the many many precautions we take people still don't SD and still are nasty. Wash your hands.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

And yes I'm not thinking this is the next great depression but it is a trickle down issue if businesses start going burst

 

[wildturkey]

You're missing my point. The more you shut people inside and take away their livelihood the more likely you see an uptick in alcoholism, opiod and drug abuse and depression/suicide.

So take Ohio that has had 400 deaths to Covid thus far...and again totally agree that number is thanks to SD and mitigation, what's the cost benefit analysis look like for shutting the economy down for let's say....three more months if we save....2000 lives? What if we lose 1000 more because of the above? A 1000 lives is a horrible thing regardless but this is our economy.


Take Vegas... it's forecasted that's 43.3 BILLION in economic loss to the country. That's with a B not an M.

You're not getting it. Your earlier posts indicate you're more concerned about the damage that's going to be done long term to the economy and that things need to start to get going. The virus is what's wrecking the economy, not the lockdown. With no lockdown, the virus runs rampant. We've seen what that looks like in other parts of the world; mortality rates in the teens. People aren't going to go out and function day to day like it ain't no thing when morality rates are that high. You end up in an economic crisis that way the same as you do with a lockdown. You're in an economic crisis but with a ton more dead. The economic ramifications are unavoidable.

We're in lockdown now. We're also in an economic crisis because again, it's unavoidable. It doesn't matter if we're in lockdown, no lockdown, somewhere in between. The virus causes a disruption. We're not ready to reopen things right now and testing still isn't where it should be to sustain proper opening up efforts. If you start reopening things right now, even phasing them in, because you're worried about the economic outlooks, you're just adding to the problem. You're already in an economic crisis and you're going to prolong it because the virus situation hasn't properly been addressed. You'll just be stuck in a loop. The virus is the driving factor. It's not a situation where you're like "welp, we're 6 weeks into this. I don't like the economic numbers looming in week 8. Time to change course". You change course when the virus let's you.

As for the addiction stuff, if hard times drives people to that, you're gonna get that regardless sadly, because again, economic doom and gloom is basically unavoidable.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

You're not getting it. Your earlier posts indicate you're more concerned about the damage that's going to be done long term to the economy and that things need to start to get going. The virus is what's wrecking the economy, not the lockdown. With no lockdown, the virus runs rampant. We've seen what that looks like in other parts of the world; mortality rates in the teens. People aren't going to go out and function day to day like it ain't no thing when morality rates are that high. You end up in an economic crisis that way the same as you do with a lockdown. You're in an economic crisis but with a ton more dead. The economic ramifications are unavoidable.

We're in lockdown now. We're also in an economic crisis because again, it's unavoidable. It doesn't matter if we're in lockdown, no lockdown, somewhere in between. The virus causes a disruption. We're not ready to reopen things right now and testing still isn't where it should be to sustain proper opening up efforts. If you start reopening things right now, even phasing them in, because you're worried about the economic outlooks, you're just adding to the problem. You're already in an economic crisis and you're going to prolong it because the virus situation hasn't properly been addressed. You'll just be stuck in a loop. The virus is the driving factor. It's not a situation where you're like "welp, we're 6 weeks into this. I don't like the economic numbers looming in week 8. Time to change course". You change course when the virus let's you.

As for the addiction stuff, if hard times drives people to that, you're gonna get that regardless sadly, because again, economic doom and gloom is basically unavoidable.

I completely disagree that we are somehow incapable of both mitigating the virus and managing a rollout of our economy. Ohio doesn't even start this for 12 days. Our hospital capacity hasn't even been close to tested for the first wave. Let's argue the second wave is even worse for arguments sake. But again the entire purpose of this was to flatten the curve so hospitals can function. That's it. No other reason. Saving lives is a side benefit of that.

To say we are just somehow handcuffed is irresponsible. A slow rollout with precautions is the only way to achieve both.

I mean some hospitals aren't screening for cancer. Cancer man. So now we have all these people that lost two months on fighting that.

This is so far beyond flattening the curve it's ridiculous.

And again for the sixth time I've been perfectly ok with the shutdown to this point. It was necessary. It had to be done. But carrying it much past a month more will do irreparable harm to our economy.

 

[wildturkey]

I completely disagree that we are somehow incapable of both mitigating the virus and managing a rollout of our economy. Ohio doesn't even start this for 12 days. Our hospital capacity hasn't even been close to tested for the first wave. Let's argue the second wave is even worse for arguments sake. But again the entire purpose of this was to flatten the curve so hospitals can function. That's it. No other reason. Saving lives is a side benefit of that.

To say we are just somehow handcuffed is irresponsible. A slow rollout with precautions is the only way to achieve both.

I mean some hospitals aren't screening for cancer. Cancer man. So now we have all these people that lost two months on fighting that.

This is so far beyond flattening the curve it's ridiculous.

And again for the sixth time I've been perfectly ok with the shutdown to this point. It was necessary. It had to be done. But carrying it much past a month more will do irreparable harm to our economy.

And again, you getting hung up on the thought that the shutdowns are going to cause too much harm to the economy. You can't be for the shut down and then say "well, but the economy". And that's exactly what you're doing. You're trying to hedge a bit by saying that stuff should be opened safely but that's a given. Of course it should be done safely. No one disputes that. But every post you're framing your statements that it needs to happen soon not because its safe from the virus and the standards are met but because if the shutdown goes on much longer, its bad economically. You're still letting the economy drive your thinking as if its just the lockdown hurting it when its the virus that has caused the disruption and will continue to cause disruptions until it can be properly controlled, even if its just limited control (which is all we'll have until vaccines are ready or some proven treatment).

The shutdowns have to stay in place until there's capacity and means to control the virus. If it has to be more than a month, it has to be more than a month. Yet several times you're like "man, the economy though." You're wanting to loosen things up because of economic impact. Letting the economy be the driving factor in the decision doesn't solve anything. The economy will still suck, the virus continues and more people are sick and more die.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

And again, you getting hung up on the thought that the shutdowns are going to cause too much harm to the economy. You can't be for the shut down and then say "well, but the economy". And that's exactly what you're doing. You're trying to hedge a bit by saying that stuff should be opened safely but that's a given. Of course it should be done safely. No one disputes that. But every post you're framing your statements that it needs to happen soon not because its safe from the virus and the standards are met but because if the shutdown goes on much longer, its bad economically. You're still letting the economy drive your thinking as if its just the lockdown hurting it when its the virus that has caused the disruption and will continue to cause disruptions until it can be properly controlled, even if its just limited control (which is all we'll have until vaccines are ready or some proven treatment).

The shutdowns have to stay in place until there's capacity and means to control the virus. If it has to be more than a month, it has to be more than a month. Yet several times you're like "man, the economy though." You're wanting to loosen things up because of economic impact. Letting the economy be the driving factor in the decision doesn't solve anything. The economy will still suck, the virus continues and more people are sick and more die.

I will bite

What's controlled look like to you?

Because that's a vague measuring stick

And for the record this is good discussion thank you

 

[Stakesarehigh]

And again though in your last sentence you mention death and sickness. That's a given. Even with lockdowns it will continue. But right now we have areas of this country that hospitals are virtually empty that are more than capable of handling a wave.

Every area is different. But you have to see how selling "keep it shut" to a state with 125 deaths in a month is a tough sell to people losing their livelihood

 

[trojanfan12]

The economy will rebound. I find it funny that everyone calls people that want to be safe and not break the lock downs too early as fear mongering, but claiming that the economy is going to tank otherwise isn't fear mongering.

From what I've seen, the hysteria goes both ways.

But here's the problem...just as areas around the world and country are experiencing this differently, so are individuals.

Someone who has lost their job because of this, is running low on money and having trouble finding a job because many businesses are closed, even if only temporarily, has a much different view than someone who can work at home and is still getting all or most of their regular pay.

The president focuses more on the economy because he ties his success rate to it. It's literally one of the few things he can point to as a success (and even that is only with a really wide angle lens). Plus, his "friends/backers" in the 1% require him to do so.

Or maybe he focuses on the economy because it's an incredibly important part of what makes the country work?

Maybe he'd like to see as many businesses stay open as possible after this thing is over, so that as many people as possible can return to work and/or have an easier time finding a new job if necessary?

 

[trojanfan12]

You're not getting it. Your earlier posts indicate you're more concerned about the damage that's going to be done long term to the economy and that things need to start to get going. The virus is what's wrecking the economy, not the lockdown. With no lockdown, the virus runs rampant. We've seen what that looks like in other parts of the world; mortality rates in the teens. People aren't going to go out and function day to day like it ain't no thing when morality rates are that high. You end up in an economic crisis that way the same as you do with a lockdown. You're in an economic crisis but with a ton more dead. The economic ramifications are unavoidable.

We're in lockdown now. We're also in an economic crisis because again, it's unavoidable. It doesn't matter if we're in lockdown, no lockdown, somewhere in between. The virus causes a disruption. We're not ready to reopen things right now and testing still isn't where it should be to sustain proper opening up efforts. If you start reopening things right now, even phasing them in, because you're worried about the economic outlooks, you're just adding to the problem. You're already in an economic crisis and you're going to prolong it because the virus situation hasn't properly been addressed. You'll just be stuck in a loop. The virus is the driving factor. It's not a situation where you're like "welp, we're 6 weeks into this. I don't like the economic numbers looming in week 8. Time to change course". You change course when the virus let's you.

Agree and disagree.

The economic crisis is caused by the virus, no doubt and it seems that the stay at home orders are working.

I also agree that it's too soon to just start opening things up.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with having discussions and planning for how and when to start re-opening things that involves several different scenarios.

Based on what's being reported, professional sports leagues are developing plans with different scenarios based on where this thing goes.

The NBA, for example, seems to have plans in place that include everything from re-starting the season in mid to late May, all the way to just canceling the season.

The NFL seems to have plans for everything from starting the season on time with no fans, to starting it on time with fans, to starting late and shortening the season.

Talks re: college football seems to be considering everything from a full season, to a 10 game season to canceling the season if students haven't returned yet.

I would also expect that any starting of a return to normal will look different in different areas based on how hard they were hit and how populous they are.

The economy is taking a hit no doubt and some folks are starting to talk about a full depression. I'd expect that there is a "sweet spot" where we can start getting the economy going again, at least enough to avoid a full depression, and avoid another outbreak. That is likely what they are hoping to hit if they can.

Of course, the question is, will those who are wanting to get things going asap push things to where we start the process too early and up with another outbreak...

Or will the folks who are pushing to keep things locked down cause us to miss that "sweet spot"?

 

[trojanfan12]

And again, you getting hung up on the thought that the shutdowns are going to cause too much harm to the economy. You can't be for the shut down and then say "well, but the economy".

You are getting too hung up on keeping things shutdown.

Yes, you absolutely can be for the shutdown and say "Well, but the economy".

In fact, that's what you have to do in order to make sure there are a variety of plans in place for getting the economy going again.

No one is saying that we should just open everything up right now. There is nothing wrong with beginning to gradually lift restrictions in areas where the numbers show it's ok to do.

Things didn't shut down at the same rate everywhere and they aren't going to return to normal at the same rate everywhere.

 

[trojanfan12]

And again though in your last sentence you mention death and sickness. That's a given. Even with lockdowns it will continue. But right now we have areas of this country that hospitals are virtually empty that are more than capable of handling a wave.

Every area is different. But you have to see how selling "keep it shut" to a state with 125 deaths in a month is a tough sell to people losing their livelihood

Last I checked, the county that I live in had just cracked 40 deaths for the entire time this has gone on.

The city I live in has had 1 confirmed case. There was a chance that my best friend (who is one of the most vulnerable) may have been the 2nd one. He was tested for it, but it turned out to be pneumonia instead (which I told him it was before he got tested lol).

We still need precautions, but not at the level we are at right now.

For example, while I think grocery stores should continue with special hours for senior citizens...

I think there could be some lessening of the restrictions for the rest of the day. Even if it's just as simple as allowing more people into the store at a time. Not full capacity, just an increase in the number allowed in at a time while still requiring masks (especially for ugly people).

 

[dtgold88]

Coronavirus News: New York virus deaths under 550 for first time since April 1

Had you heard this?

https://nypost.com/2020/04/01/cbs-a...AfisWOtE6-G1YLKUt2_cJAPqkpMBQ7xZ0zzIFjAgxtcdc

 

[bksballer89]

NY went from 778 deaths on April 13th to 507 deaths yesterdays (with less than 500 of those deaths coming from hospitals)

 

[DJ Fieri]

For Mecca & all the married guys.

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[bksballer89]

Wiggy always told me Jimmy was a terrible teammate and cancer.
@TurnUpTheHeat @Heatles84

 

[Wamu]

Wiggy always told me Jimmy was a terrible teammate and cancer.
@TurnUpTheHeat @Heatles84

If Butler played for the Cavs wiggy would be swining off his nuts like a jungle gym proclaiming his greatness as the vet who would turn things around in Cleveland.

 

[msgkings322]

Wiggy always told me Jimmy was a terrible teammate and cancer.
@TurnUpTheHeat @Heatles84

I honestly can't remember the last time Wiggy had a take that turned out correct