How Is Covid-19 Impacting Life in Your City?

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by 10023

It doesn’t matter whether you think it’s “fair”. If you think it’s unfair you should take it up with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or with the whole process of ageing that weakens the immune system in later life, or with the people whose own poor diets and exercise habits made them obese and therefore less able to fight off the infection as well. It is what it is.

You misunderstood, or I fooked up. I meant dismissing everything you said with one word "nonsense" was unfair.

If anything, it’s unfair to impose a sort of society-wide collective punishment for over a year, when the lives of most people could have been improved greatly by encouraging greater caution amongst a minority.

I counter with it doesn't matter what you think, and you can take it up with the UK or US authorities. What's even worse is the lockdown happened and there's nothing anybody did about it. It was not stopped, even the Tman could not stop it.

The old have lived their lives. They enjoyed their 20s, 30s end 40s. They could have stayed home for a bit longer, for their own well-being, and we could have avoided subsequent lockdowns after the initial (and necessary) one last spring. That’s all there is to it.

That's not good enough to lift lockdown policy and lacks sources. Can you provide a source that says since they lived till 40, they deserve to be infected and possibly die of covid?

[10023]

^ That’s not what I’m saying.

They should have stayed home and not gone to the pub the first day they reopened. The government basically had to close shops, restaurants and bars again, and then again, to keep old people from going to them and catching Covid. The only thing young people needed to do was avoid getting close to older relatives. And that should have been the government guidance (it wasn’t).

It’s a pretty simple concept really. More caution amongst the vulnerable would have meant less caution required by everyone else to achieve the same outcome. I’m not saying the rest of us could have lived our lives like it was 2019, but there was very clearly no appropriate “one size fits all” approach and yet that’s the approach governments took. And the simple reason why is that governments and media are run by Baby Boomers.

We’ve been fucked by that generation is so many ways. This is just the latest example.

[craigs]

I think we've learned we should plan for handling airborne coronavirus pandemics differently going forward, but Lord Pretend's "fuck the fatties 'n' geezers!" approach is unmerited.

[10023]

Originally Posted by craigs

I think we've learned we should plan for handling airborne coronavirus pandemics differently going forward, but Lord Pretend's "fuck the fatties 'n' geezers!" approach is unmerited.

I’m certainly never complying with another lockdown of stay at home order again. They’ll have to shoot me.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by 10023

I’m certainly never complying with another lockdown of stay at home order again. They’ll have to shoot me.

Don't tempt them.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by 10023

I’m certainly never complying with another lockdown of stay at home order again. They’ll have to shoot me.

Thoughts 'n' prayers.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by 10023

I’m certainly never complying with another lockdown of stay at home order again. They’ll have to shoot me.

There has never been a true lockdown order in a western democracy and in the US there's never been one that was enforced. They all permitted leaving home for "essential activities", loosely defined and often including solitary exercise. But, again, in the US nowhere that I know of were police or anyone handing out fines or any other punishment for simply being out of your home.

And if it should ever come to that, non-judicial house arrest, I wouldn't comply in any way that I didn't see as in the interest of my own safety and truly that of the public either. That said, in the early days of this pandemic I think it did make sense to stay home as much as possible. As we learned more, more activities seemed reasonable and the official pronouncements often didn't keep up in many places while in others they went too far too fast. I always seemed to me a matter of thinking for yourself.

Did any one else watch the CDC director on the Sunday shows try to defend the official acts of her agency? I almost felt sorry for her.

-- People don't need to wear masks indoors if they are fully vaccinated.

Well how are we to know who is fully vaccinated?

--People should look out for their own interest by wearing a mask when they aren't vaccinated.

(Unasked question). But you always told us masks were for the protection of others, not ourselves. Are you asking us to depend on other people, people who won't get vaccinated or wear a mask, to look out for our welfare?

Well, do you support vaccine passports so store owners and others can know who actually is vaccinated even though the Administration doesn't?

--That will be a local matter: Up to localities and businesses.

So you want businesses to be the vaccination police? And what about their employees? People can shop elsewhere if they aren't comfortable with a business's policies but its employees have to live with them and their unions aren't happy about it . . . .

And on and on it went.

[Pedestrian]

Companies Ponder Speeding Up Plans to Bring Workers Back to Offices
By Chip Cutter and Konrad Putzier
Updated May 16, 2021 3:17 pm ET

Rich Lesser, the chief executive officer of Boston Consulting Group, gathered with his executives Friday in the wake of the CDC’s new guidance that says vaccinated Americans no longer need to wear masks and observe social distancing in most instances.

At issue is whether the relaxed rules change how quickly BCG and other companies should bring workers back into skyscrapers from Manhattan to San Francisco.

“It was a surprising decision,” Mr. Lesser said of the new federal guidelines. He said BCG executives would be holding more meetings to think through the company’s plans on Sunday and Monday . . . .

In California, technology company Salesforce.com Inc. said the CDC’s announcement didn’t change its plans for masking or distancing. Salesforce hasn’t mandated vaccinations for its 56,000 employees around the world, and it is initially inviting vaccinated workers in the U.S. to come back to offices in places such as San Francisco and Irvine, Calif., in groups of about 100 people at a time, said Brent Hyder, the company’s chief people officer.

In New York, the day after the CDC announced its new guidance, real-estate attorney Jeffrey Schwartz and his partners met for an outdoor lunch at a restaurant a short walk from their Madison Avenue offices. One or two partners at Schwartz Sladkus Reich Greenberg Atlas LLP said they wanted to let people walk around the office without masks immediately, but most said they weren’t ready . . . .

In Indiana, drugmaker Eli Lilly said it would stick to plans announced last week before the CDC’s new guidance. It aims to bring back 25% of its office workers—roughly 1,750 people—to its downtown Indianapolis headquarters on June 1. Only vaccinated employees can come into the office that month, CEO David Ricks said. Social-distancing and mask requirements will stay in place until July 12, when Eli Lilly opens its offices to more workers, though the company will keep monitoring health data, a spokesman said . . . .

Mandating that workers get vaccinated is generally legal in most instances, employment attorneys said, as long as exemptions are made for medical or religious reasons. That hasn’t stopped lawsuits from being filed over the issue in places such as New Mexico and California. Most employers have shied away from making the shots a requirement, but more may be considering mandates.

Delta Air Lines Inc. said that, beginning Monday, it would require all new hires to be vaccinated, unless they qualify for an accommodation. The airline doesn’t plan to require current employees to be vaccinated, though the company said 60% of the airline’s workers have already received shots. In a broadcast interview with CNN, Delta CEO Ed Bastian said existing employees who chose not to get vaccinated might be restricted from flying international flights . . . .

Enforcing vaccine requirements can be complicated, according to employment lawyers. Companies can request proof of vaccination, though bosses run legal risks if they probe the reasons behind a worker’s hesitancy, lawyers said.

Real-estate professionals were split over whether the CDC news would prompt a more rapid return to city centers, with some calling it an important step toward making people comfortable with returning. Others said the new guidance mattered less than what state officials require.

“Local regulations supersede the CDC, and states have been all over the place,” said Adam Portnoy, chief executive of the RMR Group, which has employees in 30 office buildings around the country . . . .

Many employers are sticking with plans to bring workers back around Labor Day, because the tight job market for workers has made some CEOs concerned about upsetting their workers or pre-empting plans they made based on prior corporate guidance, executives said.

“Employers are walking a tightrope,” Mr. Portnoy said. “They want people back but don’t want a plan that will create attrition in the workforce.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/compani...d=hp_lead_pos3

Yup, I think the pendulum is swinging back toward a return to the office as local policies allow it and away some vision of long term WAH nirvana.

But I'm waiting for lawsuits not only by employees unhappy with their employers' policies but also people who may catch COVID and blame it on employers and businesses being insufficiently vigilant that any unmasked people in the store or workplace have been vaccinated (or are frequently tested). I don't think legally just taking peoples' word is going to fly.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Interesting working paper here: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/working-paper/2021-56/


Anecdotally, this squares with my experience of spending more time working to get approximately the same (or less done, since my makeshift home lab is nothing like a real lab). These last few weeks I've been going to campus much more often and it's been great.

Obviously different people will have different experiences, and it's certainly possible for some individuals to be more productive WFH, but clearly this does not generalize to the population.

Yes and I suspect the longer this goes on, 2 things will happen: Productivity will fall further and people will come to dislike the blurring of personal time and company time. They will want to be uninterrupted evenings and weekends when bosses or colleagues may choose to work and want to communicate on business matters.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by 10023

Better to just say “look, this virus is very dangerous to the elderly, the obese and the immune-compromised, more so than even a bad flu strain, so please wear a mask in public places where you might be around such people, and keep your distance from elderly relatives”. That would have been perfectly reasonable and rational guidance. And again, not visiting grandma was always more important than not dining indoors.

Except that was never your prescription. You wanted to restrict the activities only of those you deemed more at risk than yourself and you wanted your own activities totally unrestricted including having dangerous businesses like bars open for your use.

[Pedestrian]

California nurses union urges state to reject CDC guidance on easing mask mandate
Jessica Flores
May 16, 2021
Updated: May 16, 2021 2:11 p.m.

The largest union of registered nurses in California is asking state officials not to follow new guidance from the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention on lifting mask mandates for people fully vaccinated against COVID-19, union officials said Sunday.

The California Nurses Association, an affiliate of the nation’s largest union of registered nurses, condemned the CDC’s guidance, calling it “a big blow to the safety and welfare of the nurses, front line workers, as well as the patients,” CNA president Zenei Triunfo-Cortez said in a phone interview Sunday.

“We have to understand that the pandemic is not over,” said Triunfo-Cortez. “There continues to be high rates of infection and people continue to die, even nurses.”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/ar...C-16181123.php

Unless nurses have gotten a whole lot wimpier than when I last worked with them, they wouldn’t be afraid to have words with those Chicago surgeons Urban Politician says won’t wear masks when entering patient rooms (and note even the CDC said their guidance that masks aren’t necessary for the vaccinated doesn’t apply in medical settings).

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by craigs

I think we've learned we should plan for handling airborne coronavirus pandemics differently going forward, but Lord Pretend's "fuck the fatties 'n' geezers!" approach is unmerited.

That's why I think the next time this happens, with something significantly more deadly, we're all fucked. Between the stupidity, the callousness, the selfishness, and the cruelty, we won't pull together, won't work together, and it's going to scythe through the population.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's why I think the next time this happens, with something significantly more deadly, we're all fucked. Between the stupidity, the callousness, the selfishness, and the cruelty, we won't pull together, won't work together, and it's going to scythe through the population.

Exactly. Nothing more needs to be said.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Unless nurses have gotten a whole lot wimpier than when I last worked with them, they wouldn’t be afraid to have words with those Chicago surgeons Urban Politician says won’t wear masks when entering patient rooms (and note even the CDC said their guidance that masks aren’t necessary for the vaccinated doesn’t apply in medical settings).

^ When did I ever say that I know of surgeons who won't wear masks entering a patient's room?

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's why I think the next time this happens, with something significantly more deadly, we're all fucked. Between the stupidity, the callousness, the selfishness, and the cruelty, we won't pull together, won't work together, and it's going to scythe through the population.

Hopefully the initial response from the government is better thought out the next time around. A lot of the skepticism in the general public can be traced back to mixed messaging from the government early in the pandemic.

[10023]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Except that was never your prescription. You wanted to restrict the activities only of those you deemed more at risk than yourself and you wanted your own activities totally unrestricted including having dangerous businesses like bars open for your use.

Bars are not “dangerous businesses”. Young people going to bars is less dangerous than young people visiting their grandparents, and less dangerous than their grandparents going shopping. That’s the point.

We can debate whether it should have been “advice”, “guidance” or something more enforceable that curtailed the activities of statistically more vulnerable individuals. None of the above was really tried, and the government here even made the stupid decision to talk about “saving Christmas” and encouraging families to gather. I suspect that in the US, where generally ample hospital and healthcare system capacity made it more a matter of personal responsibility and risk, advice or guidance would have been enough. In countries like the UK, with more constrained healthcare system capacity and a real chance of systemic “collapse”, it would have needed to be enforceable.

But if we want the policy response to “follow the science”, the rules needed to have distinguished between people more and less at risk from the virus. Otherwise the one-size-fits-all approach is inherently not protective enough of the vulnerable and too restrictive of the majority of people (to the point that they are encouraged to subvert the rules).

[10023]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's why I think the next time this happens, with something significantly more deadly, we're all fucked. Between the stupidity, the callousness, the selfishness, and the cruelty, we won't pull together, won't work together, and it's going to scythe through the population.

Maybe that’s what the population needs? The graying of the population and top-heavy demographic pyramid is the biggest problem facing developed countries/economies anyway. And the planet is generally overpopulated.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ When did I ever say that I know of surgeons who won't wear masks entering a patient's room?

I think that was bnk that said that. Ped might be getting his IL/WI healthcare worker forumers mixed up in his advanced age.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's why I think the next time this happens, with something significantly more deadly, we're all fucked. Between the stupidity, the callousness, the selfishness, and the cruelty, we won't pull together, won't work together, and it's going to scythe through the population.

Maybe the reason people are even acting like this in the first place is BECAUSE this wasn't that bad of a pandemic. Had this thing been like the Spanish Flu, I am willing to bet everyone would be wearing their masks. The truth is people were smart enough to look past the politics and see the statistics and make their own risk assessments for themselves and those they love.

If people have the luxury to complain about wearing a mask during a pandemic, then the pandemic wasn't really that bad to begin with. I know that sounds horrible to try to downplay the lives lost, and it was bad.... but compared to other pandemics we have gone through over the centuries, this was nothing.....

[10023]

Originally Posted by twister244

Maybe the reason people are even acting like this in the first place is BECAUSE this wasn't that bad of a pandemic. Had this thing been like the Spanish Flu, I am willing to bet everyone would be wearing their masks. The truth is people were smart enough to look past the politics and see the statistics and make their own risk assessments for themselves and those they love.

If people have the luxury to complain about wearing a mask during a pandemic, then the pandemic wasn't really that bad to begin with. I know that sounds horrible to try to downplay the lives lost, and it was bad.... but compared to other pandemics we have gone through over the centuries, this was nothing.....

Bingo.

Covid is a more severe disease than a typical winter flu, but the people at risk were generally the same ones at risk from flu. And I just don’t get worked up about the deaths of people in their 80s and 90s from what is, in actual fact, a natural cause. The risk to the young was transparently overstated for political reasons and we shouldn’t shut the world down for a year to save anyone who needs to live in nursing care.

If this was like the virus from Contagion, then you wouldn’t really need to mask shame anybody.