theJ Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 1 minute ago, JDBrocks said: OR, hear me out, you could say what you actually mean. "Who cares as long as it works" is not a path that I want to go down, nor do I believe that anyone else does. I'm not going to retype every post from the last 3 pages. You can read them, or just quote the one post out of context. Your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WizeGuy Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 13 minutes ago, mission27 said: I'm very pro wearing a mask. But what is causing the spread? Its environments where you aren't going to wear a mask. Mainly bars and restaurants over capacity. That's the issue. Close those places and/or enforce strict capacity rules and young people will socialize in environments that are less conducive to spread, or at least conducive to only spreading illness within social groups rather than to large numbers of strangers. I will say- as of today- my region has had indoor dining at bars for nearly a month. We haven't seen any drastic spikes yet, though our positive case percentage has slightly increased from .8% to 1.2%, but our regional health director says that's due to better contact tracing. The difference here compared to say Arizona is the policies are strict and the penalties for breaking those policies are harsh. My dad has been going to bars since they reopened. He told me the bars are organized to promote social distancing and the people in the bar follow the rules. People have to wear masks if they're not dining, and even then, people seem to be following those rules. Limit capacity is set at 50%. If a bar tries to break these rule they may get their liquor license taken. As of mid-June, 20 (ish) bars around NY state had their liquor license suspended. Bar owners tightened up once word traveled around that the hammer will come crashing down if rules are broken. The first week bars opened there was news of a potential outbreak as someone who went out tested positive for COVID a few days later. I thought for sure we were going to see stories similar to the Michigan bar outbreak. The person who tested positive went to multiple bars in one of the busiest sections in town which also happens to be where a majority of the college aged kids go. A few weeks passed, and the story eventually died. Obviously a surge could still happen. All it takes is one person to go to one bar that doesn't follow the guidelines. Hopefully the numbers continue to stay low. I'm grateful my county is in phase 4 of reopening and seems to have a handle on everything. I feel for those people down south who have to revert back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, mission27 said: Exactly. Its the same reason abstinence only sex ed doesn't work. Public policy that is based on unrealistic assumptions about how compliant people will be, in the face of basic social and biological urges telling them not to comply, will never be effective. Lets try stuff that could actually work. Packing the bars, restaurants, casinos etc (and/or) refusing to wear a mask or practice some semblance of social distancing are not "basic social and biological urges" in a world that values information and informed decisions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 People should wear masks, and adhere to science based guidelines. They should not congregate in large groups or participate in activities that promote the spread of COVID. Period end of story. Easing restrictions or changing policy for a group of people because "they won't listen anyway" is a terrible approach and will prolong the problem and promote more death/illness than is necessary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 1 minute ago, Leader said: Packing the bars, restaurants, casinos etc (and/or) refusing to wear a mask or practice some semblance of social distancing are not "basic social and biological urges" in a world that values information and informed decisions. But this is exactly my point. Its up to policy makers to shut down the highest risk venues and encourage people to socialize in safer settings (outdoors, low capacity restaurants, etc.) because young people have a different cost-benefit in this thing and don't always make the best decisions and they will socialize. Shutting down high-risk venues and regulating crowd sizes is the only way to slow this thing down. I don't know how old you are but as someone in the 20-40 age range, going out with my friends and meeting new people and getting laid is absolutely a basic social and biological urge that I will and do willingly sacrifice my health for. In normal times the main venue for that type of activity is a crowded bar. mission is very informed & has been more careful than most. If you want the masses to be cooperative though you need to bend their behavior through restrictions that still leave opportunities to socialize and live their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Watching Americans argue that 20-somethings are biologically incapable of isolating themselves and abiding by social distancing requirements seems strange given that European 20 somethings were able to do so successfully enough to stop spreading the virus. It's strange to me the same way it was strange to me in school seeing a kid who never did his homework or paid attention in class argue with the teacher that the test was impossible, despite him being the only kid that failed. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 10 minutes ago, JDBrocks said: People should wear masks, and adhere to science based guidelines. They should not congregate in large groups or participate in activities that promote the spread of COVID. Period end of story. Easing restrictions or changing policy for a group of people because "they won't listen anyway" is a terrible approach and will prolong the problem and promote more death/illness than is necessary. Nobody is talking about "easing" restrictions. Restrictions were clearly eased too far in places like Florida. We are talking about placing the onus on policy makers to come up with restrictions most people will willingly follow, that still allow for people to live their lives, and then enforce these restrictions. Which actually means more restrictions, in places like Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Watching Americans argue that 20-somethings are biologically incapable of isolating themselves and abiding by social distancing requirements seems strange given that European 20 somethings were able to do so successfully enough to stop spreading the virus. This is BS. We isolated for longer than they did. We opened up later. And judging by the Instagram stories of dozens of friends in Europe, they are doing the exact same **** people are doing here (large gatherings of young people, parties, bars, restaurants, you name it). The difference is public policy and climate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, mission27 said: Nobody is talking about "easing" restrictions. Restrictions were clearly eased too far in places like Florida. We are talking about placing the onus on policy makers to come up with restrictions most people will willingly follow, that still allow for people to live their lives, and then enforce these restrictions. Which actually means more restrictions, in places like Florida. You continue to use "live their lives" like it has some sort of weight. If "Living their lives" means engaging in behavior that will spread Covid unnecessarily, then no, making policy to allow for that is not a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, mission27 said: This is BS. We isolated for longer than they did. We opened up later. And judging by the Instagram stories of dozens of friends in Europe, they are doing the exact same **** people are doing here (large gatherings of young people, parties, bars, restaurants, you name it). The difference is public policy and climate. I've made my stance on exactly why the US is failing clear, so I won't re-tread it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theJ Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, JDBrocks said: You continue to use "live their lives" like it has some sort of weight. If "Living their lives" means engaging in behavior that will spread Covid unnecessarily, then no, making policy to allow for that is not a good idea. He's arguing to change policy to make it more restrictive, not less. I'm literally chuckling at my computer right now because it's like you're reading the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theJ Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Watching Americans argue that 20-somethings are biologically incapable of isolating themselves and abiding by social distancing requirements seems strange given that European 20 somethings were able to do so successfully enough to stop spreading the virus. It's strange to me the same way it was strange to me in school seeing a kid who never did his homework or paid attention in class argue with the teacher that the test was impossible, despite him being the only kid that failed. Socialization is a human biological need. It absolutely is. We need to allow it, but safely. Currently we are allowing it, but unsafely. Policy should be changed accordingly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, theJ said: He's arguing to change policy to make it more restrictive, not less. I'm literally chuckling at my computer right now because it's like you're reading the opposite. 9 minutes ago, mission27 said: going out with my friends and meeting new people and getting laid is absolutely a basic social and biological urge that I will and do willingly sacrifice my health for. In normal times the main venue for that type of activity is a crowded bar. mission is very informed & has been more careful than most. If you want the masses to be cooperative though you need to bend their behavior through restrictions that still leave opportunities to socialize and live their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theJ Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 @JDBrocks Let me clear it up in once sentence - the argument is to close up venues that risky, and promote socialization in safer venues. Now let's clear up your stance. Do you want things to remain as-is? It is clearly not working. Or are you saying that we should have a full quarantine and that no one should see each other? Because the latter won't work. All that will happen there is people will meet up at their homes and spread it there. We should be promoting safer socialization. An alternative that gives us both socialization, and reduced spread. I can't see why you'd be opposed to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, JDBrocks said: You continue to use "live their lives" like it has some sort of weight. If "Living their lives" means engaging in behavior that will spread Covid unnecessarily, then no, making policy to allow for that is not a good idea. Yes, living our lives increases the risk of COVID spread which is why when the outbreak was at its worse everyone put their lives on hold. No socializing, no seeing friends and family, no going to work. That wasn't sustainable. We had to figure out how to open up while continuing to limit the most high risk activities. Some places have done much better than others. I don't think its because young people in Florida are worse people than young people in New York or Europe. Its public policy and climate related. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts