The frustrating thing is that people like ObviousTroll2020 will point to a lack of cases in Sturgis as some sort of evidence that COVID isn't what it is. It's the Vegas effect. If it opened all the way up, Vegas would still not have a lot of cases, as people go there, catch it, go home and then develop symptoms there. It's as if contact tracing doesn't exist.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Covfefe-19 The 12th Part: The Only Thing Worse Than This New Board Is TrumpVirus2020
- Thread starter Handyman
- Start date
- Status
The frustrating thing is that people like ObviousTroll2020 will point to a lack of cases in Sturgis as some sort of evidence that COVID isn't what it is. It's the Vegas effect. If it opened all the way up, Vegas would still not have a lot of cases, as people go there, catch it, go home and then develop symptoms there. It's as if contact tracing doesn't exist.
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
^^#TeamAppocalypse
Sounds really, really Scary. I mean really.
Back in reality.
https://mobile.twitter.com/covid_clarity/status/1299415451378696192
With 70,000+ infected people studied in MN…
> There are more deaths age 90+ than age 70 and below
> 99.9% covid survival outside long term care
> 99.97% covid survival for ages under 60
> Avg age of death is 6 yrs beyond life expectancy
Funny how the so-called "scientists" haven't pushed back when confronted with, y'know, the data.
Since I know a lot of you folks call Minnesota home, I figured I'd share this stuff with y'all ...
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...trump-n2575265
Dolt On #TeamWetTheBed ^^^
https://mobile.twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1299438720559403010
If we assume 8% infection rate here in San Diego County. With 98% specificity and 99% sensitivity... If we test just 1650 people that will yield 33 false positives right there. We will never make it to the lowest setting and businesses will be closed for good.
net presence
Active member
Hey Chuck, great to see you still haven't figured things out. Guess what, I actually know the guy and it's well known he's not very bright. Couple thoughts on what he said since I live an hour away from the "Iron Range" and, actually have a good friend who's a manager at one of the mines, along with many others who live there.
First, the "Range" isn't roaring back. Things have stabilized but, there's still more people leaving than coming. Next, he says. "leaders like Joe Biden" haven't helped with their issues regarding trade with China. What specifically does he think Joe could've done back when the Chinese first started dumping cheap steel into the market 20 years when those mines really took their significant hits? Not much a single senator could address/fix. Trust me, it's been Republican policies over the past 30 years that have exacerbated there already significant issues due to higher production costs -- mainly in regards to workers wages/benefits. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of paying those folks what they make but, that is THE key reason why the cost of American steel is so much higher.
Next, he says Trump has "cut our taxes"....the median income on the "Range" varies from $38,000 to $55,000. And, almost no one in that income range saw any type of a significant tax reduction. Here's a couple of links to articles that explain this. Chuck, I realize you probably won't even attempt to read them as that might expose you to information that actually contradicts your brain washing but...
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-fr...ve-it-to-them/
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...-consequences/
Distribution of Trump Tax Cuts Favors Wealthiest
On average, in 2018, taxes declined for everyone, but top groups got the biggest benefit
*******https://fanforum.uscho.com/core/img/chart-1-medium.png********
Income group (Average income) Percent change in after-tax income or a total of $...
Lowest quintile ($14,170) 0.4% $56.68
Second quintile ($36,450) 1.2% $437.40
Middle quintile ($65,640) 1.6% $1,050.24
Fourth quintile ($114,370) 1.9% $2,173.03
Top quintile ($347,940) 2.9% $10.090.26
https://itep.org/tcja-2020/
Source: Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), “TCJA by the Numbers, 2020.”
The richest 1% of taxpayers will get an average tax cut of $50,000 in 2020 from the Trump-GOP tax cuts. That’s over 75 times more than the tax cut for the bottom 80% of taxpayers, which will average $645.
Bottom line Chuck, probably 98% of the people that live on the "Iron Range" could drink away their tax cuts in two weekends -- Rangers love their cheap, shi--y beer. So, more evidence that, not only is this guy not living in the real world, he doesn't even understand that 98% of his constituents literally didn't get jack s--t from Trump's tax cut.
net presence
Active member
Dolt On #TeamWetTheBed ^^^
https://mobile.twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1299438720559403010
If we assume 8% infection rate here in San Diego County. With 98% specificity and 99% sensitivity... If we test just 1650 people that will yield 33 false positives right there. We will never make it to the lowest setting and businesses will be closed for good.
"Hey 1820 (let's be honest, that's the time frame that your level of education regarding science and research is at)......
Please respond to the following Op-Ed from the New York Times from three weeks ago co-authored by Michael Osterholm and Neel Kashkari. I'm sure you're aware by now that Michael Osterholm is one of the most respected infectious disease experts in the planet and, if you don't know, Kashkari is the President of the Minneapolis Fed. So, two experts in both the virus itself and finance and economics. Since I know you probably wouldn't/won't read it in its' entirety, I will provide a few paragraphs from the article...
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/o...ent-death.html
"We believe the choice is clear. We can continue to allow the coronavirus to spread rapidly throughout the country or we can commit to a more restrictive lockdown, state by state, for up to six weeks to crush the spread of the virus to less than one new case per 100,000 people per day. That’s the point at which we will be able to limit the increase in new cases through aggressive public health measures, just as other countries have done. But we’re a long way from there right now."
Notice "1820"... 1 case in every 100,000 people per day...That's when the experts say we could potentially start to safely open things up.
"And the next six months could make what we have experienced so far seem like just a warm-up to a greater catastrophe. With many schools and colleges starting, stores and businesses reopening, and the beginning of the indoor heating season, new case numbers will grow quickly. Why did the United States’ Covid-19 containment response fail, particularly compared with the successful results of so many nations in Asia, Europe and even our neighbor Canada. Simply, we gave up on our lockdown efforts to control virus transmission well before the virus was under control. Many other countries didn’t let up until the number of cases was greatly reduced, even in places that had extensive outbreaks in March and April."
"The United States recorded its lowest seven-day average since March 31 on May 28, when it was 21,000 cases, or 6.4 new cases per 100,000 people per day. This rate was seven to 10 times higher than the rates in countries that successfully contained their new infections."
Key part there... "we gave up on our lockdown efforts to control virus transmission well before the virus was under control" and.. "we recorded our lowest seven-day average on May 28, when it was 21,000 cases, or 6.4 new cases per 100,000 per day"
"At this level of national cases — 17 new cases per 100,000 people per day — we simply don’t have the public health tools to bring the pandemic under control. Our testing capacity is overwhelmed in many areas, resulting in delays that make contact tracing and other measures to control the virus virtually impossible."
This next paragraph is very important. Obviously, you'll disagree with the two people with FAR MORE knowledge than you regarding this issue. Still..
"To successfully drive down our case rate to less than one per 100,000 people per day, we should mandate sheltering in place for everyone but the truly essential workers. By that, we mean people must stay at home and leave only for essential reasons: food shopping and visits to doctors and pharmacies while wearing masks and washing hands frequently. According to the Economic Policy Institute, 39 percent of workers in the United States are in essential categories. The problem with the March-to-May lockdown was that it was not uniformly stringent across the country. For example, Minnesota deemed 78 percent of its workers essential. To be effective, the lockdown has to be as comprehensive and strict as possible. If we aren’t willing to take this action, millions more cases with many more deaths are likely before a vaccine might be available. In addition, the economic recovery will be much slower, with far more business failures and high unemployment for the next year or two. The path of the virus will determine the path of the economy. There won’t be a robust economic recovery until we get control of the virus."
So, the experts -- virus and economic -- are saying we didn't lockdown strictly or long enough.
D
Deleted member 3166
Guest
Always amazes me that the "party of life" only cares about death with this disease but simultaneously doesn't care at all that people are dying.
WisconsinWildcard
The plural of anecdote is not data
I think one of my favorite part of the idiots talking points is the assumption of average life expectancy. It really helps weed out the morons though.
If someone is 84...their life expectancy is not 77. Life expectancy changes as you age. It is like they do not understand actuarial science or insurance at all.
Fucking embarrassing
If someone is 84...their life expectancy is not 77. Life expectancy changes as you age. It is like they do not understand actuarial science or insurance at all.
Fucking embarrassing
leswp1
Well-known member
I haven't heard anything in lower schools. Keene was supposed to return and the RAs were positive. And Franklin Pierce. in NH.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
It’s kind of an interesting paradox. The longer you live, the longer you’re expected to live.
Wonder where that curve starts turning back down.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
jfc - the latest social media claim is you're more likely to die from a lightning strike than Covid. While this may be technically true (estimated 2.5%) lighting strikes kill as many as 6,000 people annually. The level of stupidity that permeates society is astounding.
D
Deleted member 3166
Guest
Life expectancy is a measure, Cupcake. It helps to provide context. The measures #TeamHysteria take to ensure there is no perspective or context and that it is just very, very, very scary is pathetic.
Don't let information send you to your Safe Space. Save it for more trying times.
https://mobile.twitter.com/covid_cla...15451378696192
With 70,000+ infected people studied in MN…
> There are more deaths age 90+ than age 70 and below
> 99.9% covid survival outside long term care
> 99.97% covid survival for ages under 60
> Avg age of death is 6 yrs beyond life expectancy
Last edited:
A large percentage of the populace believes that 9% of the country has died from Covid. So you are definitely on the right track about, astounding stupidity.
https://www.franklintempletonnordic....m-science.html
Six months into this pandemic, Americans still dramatically misunderstand the risk of dying from COVID-19:
- On average, Americans believe that people aged 55 and older account for just over half of total COVID-19 deaths; the actual figure is 92%.
- Americans believe that people aged 44 and younger account for about 30% of total deaths; the actual figure is 2.7%.
- Americans overestimate the risk of death from COVID-19 for people aged 24 and younger
- by a factor of 50; and they think the risk for people aged 65 and older is half of what it actually is (40% vs 80%).
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/jhaskinscabrera/...49789401837569
This is very important: Not only is COVID significantly less deadly to the elderly if they're not in LTC, but it's also significantly less deadly to those in assisted living. The vulnerable are those we would expect: those frail enough to be in skilled nursing care.
This is very important: Not only is COVID significantly less deadly to the elderly if they're not in LTC, but it's also significantly less deadly to those in assisted living. The vulnerable are those we would expect: those frail enough to be in skilled nursing care.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
jfc the replies make me weep.
Olsterholm is an epidemiologist. He is not an expert in modeling, he is not an expert in applying modeling to real world decisions (the two are two very different things), and he isn't an expert in lockdowns as they have never been attempted like this in anyone's lifetime. The predictions Olsterholm has made since March based on extremely flawed models have been epically wrong.
The false positives alone would ensure the parameters that were laid out would never be met. The insanity could literally go on forever.
Also, they are relying on "modeling" still, modeling that was so absurdly wrong which led to the hysteria in the first place. They should be relying on the massive amounts of real world data that is now available.
Not once in the article do they mention the consequences of lockdowns. That was actually a very awful article to base your argument on.
The world's toughest lockdown has resulted in the world's highest COVID-19 death toll
https://jordanschachtel.substack.com...t-lockdown-hashttps://jordanschachtel.substack.com...t-lockdown-has
The lockdown has been a catastrophe
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...a-catastrophe/
Israel has had one of the stricktest lockdowns in the world.
NONE OF THIS IS NORMAL. None of this should be viewed as anything but the ultimate temporary stopgap, to be undone as soon as possible. The burden is on those who would lock us down, not the other way around. Please don’t let anyone convince you otherwise.
Last edited:
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Registered User
^^
First off, you don't test positive for Covid-19.
Another 481 COVID-19 cases found at University of Alabama
Second off, lmao
The additional 481 cases on the Tuscaloosa campus were reported between Aug. 25 and Aug. 27. The university system said no students are hospitalized.
Thirdly, one more for good measure. lmao
It went from “flatten the curve and space out infections so the healthcare system isn’t overwhelmed” to “one new infection makes the news and means we need to shut everything down again.” And so often that "case" is asymptomatic and most likely not an active infection. This is the panic now.
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Disingenuous bullcrap conflation, but not surprising, given the forum. It's really not that difficult. When the phrase "beyond life expectancy" is used, it doesn't mean life expectancy in the moment. It means the average life expectancy for a person born at a certain time (usually by year). For example, if a person born in 1937 on average has a 77 year life expectancy, and passes away at age 83 in 2020, it means they have lived "beyond life expectancy". Not at all complicated now, is it?
But if you want to conflate life expectancy in the moment then no one - NO ONE - would ever live "beyond life expectancy" because even if you manage to make it to 100 years old, you will still have a year or two life expectancy looking forward.
Two separate concepts. So either you're intentionally conflating the two, or you're thick as a brick.
Effing embarrassing indeed, eh Skippy ...
- Status