[BostonCard]

The original post at least mentions COVID-19, and insurance coverage is germane.  However, I'm sympathetic to Lex; the post had more to do with ACA and the decision to challenge its constitutionality in the Supreme Court than it is about COVID-19, and the ACA is one of the most frought political issues of the last decade.  And I also agree with him that the post was heavy on editorialization.

However this post started, it has turned into an argument of whether the original post violated Terry's rule or not, which itself seems unrelated to COVID-19.

If you want to focus on whether declaring the ACA unconstitutional will have an impact on COVID-19 (note, the case wouldn't be heard until the fall, and wouldn't be decided until 2021), have at it, but please keep the focus on the relationship to COVID-19.

BC

This is just too much fun!  The challenge now is obviously to see whether it's possible to get a thread shut down under the Terry Rule by excessive discussion of... the Terry Rule!  

Hard to imagine a better way to spend a toasty Friday afternoon in late June... :-)

For what it is worth, I haven't locked any threads, and I don't plan to.  Since I participate in the discussions, and I occasionally inadvertently get carried away and have posted a few questionable posts, I sort of feel like it would be a conflict of interest if I were also arbiter of what is and is  not acceptable.  I do post my opinion of when I think things are starting to head in that direction, but you don't have to be a mod to do so.

BC

[BostonCard]

The original post at least mentions COVID-19, and insurance coverage is germane.  However, I'm sympathetic to Lex; the post had more to do with ACA and the decision to challenge its constitutionality in the Supreme Court than it is about COVID-19, and the ACA is one of the most frought political issues of the last decade.  And I also agree with him that the post was heavy on editorialization.

However this post started, it has turned into an argument of whether the original post violated Terry's rule or not, which itself seems unrelated to COVID-19.

If you want to focus on whether declaring the ACA unconstitutional will have an impact on COVID-19 (note, the case wouldn't be heard until the fall, and wouldn't be decided until 2021), have at it, but please keep the focus on the relationship to COVID-19.

BC

This is just too much fun!  The challenge now is obviously to see whether it's possible to get a thread shut down under the Terry Rule by excessive discussion of... the Terry Rule!  

Hard to imagine a better way to spend a toasty Friday afternoon in late June... :-)

For what it is worth, I haven't locked any threads, and I don't plan to.  Since I participate in the discussions, and I occasionally inadvertently get carried away and have posted a few questionable posts, I sort of feel like it would be a conflict of interest if I were also arbiter of what is and is  not acceptable.  I do post my opinion of when I think things are starting to head in that direction, but you don't have to be a mod to do so.

BC

[Genuine Realist]

The original post at least mentions COVID-19, and insurance coverage is germane.  However, I'm sympathetic to Lex; the post had more to do with ACA and the decision to challenge its constitutionality in the Supreme Court than it is about COVID-19, and the ACA is one of the most frought political issues of the last decade.  And I also agree with him that the post was heavy on editorialization.

However this post started, it has turned into an argument of whether the original post violated Terry's rule or not, which itself seems unrelated to COVID-19.

If you want to focus on whether declaring the ACA unconstitutional will have an impact on COVID-19 (note, the case wouldn't be heard until the fall, and wouldn't be decided until 2021), have at it, but please keep the focus on the relationship to COVID-19.

BC

This is just too much fun!  The challenge now is obviously to see whether it's possible to get a thread shut down under the Terry Rule by excessive discussion of... the Terry Rule!  

Hard to imagine a better way to spend a toasty Friday afternoon in late June... :-)

For what it is worth, I haven't locked any threads, and I don't plan to.  Since I participate in the discussions, and I occasionally inadvertently get carried away and have posted a few questionable posts, I sort of feel like it would be a conflict of interest if I were also arbiter of what is and is  not acceptable.  I do post my opinion of when I think things are starting to head in that direction, but you don't have to be a mod to do so.

BC

The major reason I insist on keeping the record straight on Trump is that the all-things-lead-to-Trump approach leads to massive oversimplification.

Trump's behavior since the point in time that the medical community reached a consensus that C-!9 was no ordinary seasonal flu )approximately March 1st)  has been beyond despicable. The opposition criticized him for unresponsiveness, to some extent unfairly, but unfair criticism is the heat that comes in the Presidential kitchen. Rather than shake it off and get on with the business of addressing the most serious national crisis since World War II (no exaggeration), he goes - as always - eyeball to eyeball with them, belittling them AND the C-19 crisis, thereby endangering both lives and the economy. The result is a completely disastrous Administration that will be mercifully gone in November. Then maybe we can begin to pick up the shattered remnants of the political dialog. If the New York Times went bankrupt on the same day, it would be proof of the existence of God. But that's too much to hope for.

BUT . . . to assume that the reaction against masks and social distancing is strictly a Trump thing is to indulge in a massive oversimplification. The sweeping SIP orders that were promulgated around March 10th were a massive rupture of the social fabric. They were of sweeping scope, unlimited duration, and extended somewhat arbitrarily. Health officials were completely tone deaf to the hardship this imposed on many service workers. (Witness the myopia of some of the posters on this Board.) Whatever you may think of the validity of the riot/protests, the spectacle of elected officials disregarding completely the rubrics they'd insisted upon only a short time before (I'm thinking particularly of Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan) did not sit well.

Pushback to this in a nation famously not composed of docile sheep was inevitable. Declaring cultural war on the resisters, which is what is happening, is just not going to work. You have to make the case. Abbot in Texas closing down bars and limiting (but not prohibiting altogether) large gatherings seems to me the way to go. We have to reassure the people whose lives where damaged by measures that may have been harsher than they should have been, that we can get this done, while returning to something like normalcy.

[Genuine Realist]

The original post at least mentions COVID-19, and insurance coverage is germane.  However, I'm sympathetic to Lex; the post had more to do with ACA and the decision to challenge its constitutionality in the Supreme Court than it is about COVID-19, and the ACA is one of the most frought political issues of the last decade.  And I also agree with him that the post was heavy on editorialization.

However this post started, it has turned into an argument of whether the original post violated Terry's rule or not, which itself seems unrelated to COVID-19.

If you want to focus on whether declaring the ACA unconstitutional will have an impact on COVID-19 (note, the case wouldn't be heard until the fall, and wouldn't be decided until 2021), have at it, but please keep the focus on the relationship to COVID-19.

BC

This is just too much fun!  The challenge now is obviously to see whether it's possible to get a thread shut down under the Terry Rule by excessive discussion of... the Terry Rule!  

Hard to imagine a better way to spend a toasty Friday afternoon in late June... :-)

For what it is worth, I haven't locked any threads, and I don't plan to.  Since I participate in the discussions, and I occasionally inadvertently get carried away and have posted a few questionable posts, I sort of feel like it would be a conflict of interest if I were also arbiter of what is and is  not acceptable.  I do post my opinion of when I think things are starting to head in that direction, but you don't have to be a mod to do so.

BC

The major reason I insist on keeping the record straight on Trump is that the all-things-lead-to-Trump approach leads to massive oversimplification.

Trump's behavior since the point in time that the medical community reached a consensus that C-!9 was no ordinary seasonal flu )approximately March 1st)  has been beyond despicable. The opposition criticized him for unresponsiveness, to some extent unfairly, but unfair criticism is the heat that comes in the Presidential kitchen. Rather than shake it off and get on with the business of addressing the most serious national crisis since World War II (no exaggeration), he goes - as always - eyeball to eyeball with them, belittling them AND the C-19 crisis, thereby endangering both lives and the economy. The result is a completely disastrous Administration that will be mercifully gone in November. Then maybe we can begin to pick up the shattered remnants of the political dialog. If the New York Times went bankrupt on the same day, it would be proof of the existence of God. But that's too much to hope for.

BUT . . . to assume that the reaction against masks and social distancing is strictly a Trump thing is to indulge in a massive oversimplification. The sweeping SIP orders that were promulgated around March 10th were a massive rupture of the social fabric. They were of sweeping scope, unlimited duration, and extended somewhat arbitrarily. Health officials were completely tone deaf to the hardship this imposed on many service workers. (Witness the myopia of some of the posters on this Board.) Whatever you may think of the validity of the riot/protests, the spectacle of elected officials disregarding completely the rubrics they'd insisted upon only a short time before (I'm thinking particularly of Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan) did not sit well.

Pushback to this in a nation famously not composed of docile sheep was inevitable. Declaring cultural war on the resisters, which is what is happening, is just not going to work. You have to make the case. Abbot in Texas closing down bars and limiting (but not prohibiting altogether) large gatherings seems to me the way to go. We have to reassure the people whose lives where damaged by measures that may have been harsher than they should have been, that we can get this done, while returning to something like normalcy.

[OutsiderFan]

There are so many people in power who are willing to see Americans die so that they can hold onto power. That's just reality. Speak it loudly.

PREACH!

No complaints about the Terry Rule.  It's only rubbish like this that I find ...unhelpful.

I agree it is rubbish that it can be said and be true. Truly breathtaking that this is posted after NYT reported on what will surely become known as Bountygate.

[OutsiderFan]

There are so many people in power who are willing to see Americans die so that they can hold onto power. That's just reality. Speak it loudly.

PREACH!

No complaints about the Terry Rule.  It's only rubbish like this that I find ...unhelpful.

I agree it is rubbish that it can be said and be true. Truly breathtaking that this is posted after NYT reported on what will surely become known as Bountygate.

[Farm93]

The major reason I insist on keeping the record straight on Trump is that the all-things-lead-to-Trump approach leads to massive oversimplification.

For 3.5 years President Trump insisted that every good thing that happened in the USA was thanks to his leadership.

Seems logical that everything bad that is happening in the USA is also thanks to his leadership.
Inconsistent mask wearing in the USA?  Thank you President Trump.
Inconsistent messaging on COVID?  Thank you President Trump.
POTUS has a number of ways to get Americans to understand the dangers of this pandemic, but he has missed the mark. 

This is a sports board so an analogy holds 

A head coach often gets way too much credit if a basketball team does well, and will get fired if a team does poorly.  Even though everyone understands the coach doesn't play on the court, they are often fired quickly after the season even if the players made all the mistakes on the court. 

President Trump is our head coach.   We are getting thrashed by COVID when other countries are doing OK now, so on a relative basis the USA is losing.

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

[Farm93]

The major reason I insist on keeping the record straight on Trump is that the all-things-lead-to-Trump approach leads to massive oversimplification.

For 3.5 years President Trump insisted that every good thing that happened in the USA was thanks to his leadership.

Seems logical that everything bad that is happening in the USA is also thanks to his leadership.
Inconsistent mask wearing in the USA?  Thank you President Trump.
Inconsistent messaging on COVID?  Thank you President Trump.
POTUS has a number of ways to get Americans to understand the dangers of this pandemic, but he has missed the mark. 

This is a sports board so an analogy holds 

A head coach often gets way too much credit if a basketball team does well, and will get fired if a team does poorly.  Even though everyone understands the coach doesn't play on the court, they are often fired quickly after the season even if the players made all the mistakes on the court. 

President Trump is our head coach.   We are getting thrashed by COVID when other countries are doing OK now, so on a relative basis the USA is losing.

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

[Goose]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

[Goose]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

[Farm93]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

I was being kind when saying his staff has stumbled.   The CDC is under his authority and it was possible with a better set of advisors the CDC could have saved a lot of lives by accepting the WHO tests, not giving away some of our PPE supplies to other countries in early 2020, etc.  However, a lot of those mistakes were made by people that who were either related to Trump, married to someone related to Trump or very loyal to Trump.   The situation required more people with relevant government experience.   They might not have done better, but they couldn't have done much worse.  The stumbling was the likely outcome if the administration was tested by something not influenced by POTUS tweets.

I have been encouraged by a few senior Republican leaders finally telling everyone to wear masks over the last couple of days.   My guess is now that the primaries are over they know they can safely pivot to the middle that wants to see people reference science and medicine.   They can do that now because the know they will not see tweets from POTUS instructing voters to support the other candidate.

[Farm93]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

I was being kind when saying his staff has stumbled.   The CDC is under his authority and it was possible with a better set of advisors the CDC could have saved a lot of lives by accepting the WHO tests, not giving away some of our PPE supplies to other countries in early 2020, etc.  However, a lot of those mistakes were made by people that who were either related to Trump, married to someone related to Trump or very loyal to Trump.   The situation required more people with relevant government experience.   They might not have done better, but they couldn't have done much worse.  The stumbling was the likely outcome if the administration was tested by something not influenced by POTUS tweets.

I have been encouraged by a few senior Republican leaders finally telling everyone to wear masks over the last couple of days.   My guess is now that the primaries are over they know they can safely pivot to the middle that wants to see people reference science and medicine.   They can do that now because the know they will not see tweets from POTUS instructing voters to support the other candidate.

[Goose]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

I was being kind when saying his staff has stumbled.   The CDC is under his authority and it was possible with a better set of advisors the CDC could have saved a lot of lives by accepting the WHO tests,

For the 9,473rd time, there was no WHO test. We have been over this ground many times before. The problem wasn't the design of the CDC test. The initial problem was they couldn't successfully manufacture it. However, even if they hadn't botched that, the "plan" was the same plan they used in the H1N1 outbreak, namely distribute the tests to each state health department lab and have them do the testing after a leisurely verification by the CDC that they could correctly run the test. Even if that plan had worked perfectly the state labs would be able to do about 6000 tests a week, based on past history. It would have been spitting in the ocean. THAT was what the real problem was, and none of that had anything to do with Trump, his relatives, or the advisors to the President. The CDC had a very flawed plan that they then botched. It is on the CDC staff, and nobody else. The CDC actually published documents pointing out the necessity of accommodating laboratory developed test at places like Quest. They knew they needed a program to get the big PCR companies like Roche and Abbot involved. In short, they knew there was a problem, and a big one. This was in 2010. The CDC didn't really attempt to fix the problem and didn't yell to high heaven that there was one. The German health organizations OTOH involved commercial testing from day 1 and attribute lots of their testing success to that fact.

Yes, trump sucks. BUT there are other serious problems that won't be fixed by Trump's departure. I greatly fear that the many serious problems with our epidemic response (at all levels, CDC, USPHS, FDA, state and county health departments) will be left unaddressed, as they were in 2008, and everybody will declare victory (Pyrrhic as it will be) and move on.

[Goose]

If this leader demanded to be given credit for economic growth and stock market performance, areas where he should know he had very little direct control, then he should have expected to get most of the credit/blame if members of his executive branch team stumble on pandemic management.

I think he/they fully well know that. That is why they have desperately tried to spin this whole thing the entire time to prove it wasn't his fault. The problem for them is that it doesn't matter if his team stumbled or not. He will get the blame, period. It is almost poetic justice that he will be defeated not for the horrible job he did on many fronts, but rather by something that actually was beyond his control.

I was being kind when saying his staff has stumbled.   The CDC is under his authority and it was possible with a better set of advisors the CDC could have saved a lot of lives by accepting the WHO tests,

For the 9,473rd time, there was no WHO test. We have been over this ground many times before. The problem wasn't the design of the CDC test. The initial problem was they couldn't successfully manufacture it. However, even if they hadn't botched that, the "plan" was the same plan they used in the H1N1 outbreak, namely distribute the tests to each state health department lab and have them do the testing after a leisurely verification by the CDC that they could correctly run the test. Even if that plan had worked perfectly the state labs would be able to do about 6000 tests a week, based on past history. It would have been spitting in the ocean. THAT was what the real problem was, and none of that had anything to do with Trump, his relatives, or the advisors to the President. The CDC had a very flawed plan that they then botched. It is on the CDC staff, and nobody else. The CDC actually published documents pointing out the necessity of accommodating laboratory developed test at places like Quest. They knew they needed a program to get the big PCR companies like Roche and Abbot involved. In short, they knew there was a problem, and a big one. This was in 2010. The CDC didn't really attempt to fix the problem and didn't yell to high heaven that there was one. The German health organizations OTOH involved commercial testing from day 1 and attribute lots of their testing success to that fact.

Yes, trump sucks. BUT there are other serious problems that won't be fixed by Trump's departure. I greatly fear that the many serious problems with our epidemic response (at all levels, CDC, USPHS, FDA, state and county health departments) will be left unaddressed, as they were in 2008, and everybody will declare victory (Pyrrhic as it will be) and move on.

[OutsiderFan]

No. Way. I thought the idea of a POTUS and his campaign deliberately sacrificing the lives of Americans for perceived political gain, was just opinion? Maybe I should continue using facts as my facts?


[tweet]https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1276963076001103877[/tweet]

---

It doesn't sound like 10x more infections than reported was opinion-based either.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1277037863994101760[/tweet]

[OutsiderFan]

No. Way. I thought the idea of a POTUS and his campaign deliberately sacrificing the lives of Americans for perceived political gain, was just opinion? Maybe I should continue using facts as my facts?


[tweet]https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1276963076001103877[/tweet]

---

It doesn't sound like 10x more infections than reported was opinion-based either.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1277037863994101760[/tweet]

[fullmetal]

Goose -- Trump's departure won't fix any of the issues that led the virus to American shores (multiple attacks on our early warning and detection capability, slow-rolling or delayed response, politicization of response).

But a hypothetical defeat for Trump in November could result in the following:
1. Greater CDC empowerment for data-driven policy response
2. Less politicization of voluntary public health measures (strong-arming GOP governors into promoting mask usage)
3. More federal leadership in sourcing/distributing PPE and maybe also getting the National Guard to contribute meaningfully
4. More coordination/cooperation between private entities working on vaccines/therapeutics 
5. Better data collection standards, more data collection efforts, more federal funding for testing capacity
6. Better usage of the Defense Production Act for PPE, tests, etc.

[fullmetal]

Goose -- Trump's departure won't fix any of the issues that led the virus to American shores (multiple attacks on our early warning and detection capability, slow-rolling or delayed response, politicization of response).

But a hypothetical defeat for Trump in November could result in the following:
1. Greater CDC empowerment for data-driven policy response
2. Less politicization of voluntary public health measures (strong-arming GOP governors into promoting mask usage)
3. More federal leadership in sourcing/distributing PPE and maybe also getting the National Guard to contribute meaningfully
4. More coordination/cooperation between private entities working on vaccines/therapeutics 
5. Better data collection standards, more data collection efforts, more federal funding for testing capacity
6. Better usage of the Defense Production Act for PPE, tests, etc.

[Mick]

Goose -- Trump's departure won't fix any of the issues that led the virus to American shores (multiple attacks on our early warning and detection capability, slow-rolling or delayed response, politicization of response).

But a hypothetical defeat for Trump in November could result in the following:
1. Greater CDC empowerment for data-driven policy response
2. Less politicization of voluntary public health measures (strong-arming GOP governors into promoting mask usage)
3. More federal leadership in sourcing/distributing PPE and maybe also getting the National Guard to contribute meaningfully
4. More coordination/cooperation between private entities working on vaccines/therapeutics 
5. Better data collection standards, more data collection efforts, more federal funding for testing capacity
6. Better usage of the Defense Production Act for PPE, tests, etc.

I don't think it's hypothetical at this point. Trump is behind by 15.5 points in the daily tracking poll and the gap is widening:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tru...l-ratings/

Assuming Biden survives (literally) through the first Tuesday in November and selects a running mate acceptable to the Progressives (my money is on Elizabeth Warren), then a few other effects of Trump's ignorance will include:

7. Some form of actual universal health care will also be implemented.
8. Faster development with more invested resources to cool things like UCSD's recent accidental discovery re: Parkinson's:
https://www.studyfinds.org/accidental-di...e-in-mice/

[Mick]

Goose -- Trump's departure won't fix any of the issues that led the virus to American shores (multiple attacks on our early warning and detection capability, slow-rolling or delayed response, politicization of response).

But a hypothetical defeat for Trump in November could result in the following:
1. Greater CDC empowerment for data-driven policy response
2. Less politicization of voluntary public health measures (strong-arming GOP governors into promoting mask usage)
3. More federal leadership in sourcing/distributing PPE and maybe also getting the National Guard to contribute meaningfully
4. More coordination/cooperation between private entities working on vaccines/therapeutics 
5. Better data collection standards, more data collection efforts, more federal funding for testing capacity
6. Better usage of the Defense Production Act for PPE, tests, etc.

I don't think it's hypothetical at this point. Trump is behind by 15.5 points in the daily tracking poll and the gap is widening:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tru...l-ratings/

Assuming Biden survives (literally) through the first Tuesday in November and selects a running mate acceptable to the Progressives (my money is on Elizabeth Warren), then a few other effects of Trump's ignorance will include:

7. Some form of actual universal health care will also be implemented.
8. Faster development with more invested resources to cool things like UCSD's recent accidental discovery re: Parkinson's:
https://www.studyfinds.org/accidental-di...e-in-mice/

[OutsiderFan]

It’s always been the case that if the ACA was upended, the next reality will be a single payer system. This is why it has been dumb to try stopping it from improving. The public will vote out of office anyone who prevents affordable and quality healthcare from being delivered to the masses.

[OutsiderFan]

It’s always been the case that if the ACA was upended, the next reality will be a single payer system. This is why it has been dumb to try stopping it from improving. The public will vote out of office anyone who prevents affordable and quality healthcare from being delivered to the masses.

[Farm93]

Goose, 
You are stuck in the logistics a bit.   

On tests 
Korea's tests.
Germany's tests.
Thailand's tests.
New York's tests.
Any place with a test in February would have been fine.  NY had to beg to use their testing resources, and it took weeks for the Federal government to allow that to happen.   Any viable test from with anyone with a test would have been great.   And they definitely existed because several countries around the world were testing at decent scale when the CDC was barely testing anyone.
That's all in the past now anyway.
Big F on prep for crisis management. 
Bigger F on crisis management.
Check, check.

We are where we are, and it doesn't look good IMHO.

Even with everything going on there are gym owners in AZ suing to stay open today.    And bars in Texas planning to ignore health orders because they need to pay their bills.
Fantastic.  And these types are open about the defiance.   How many others will just silently defy orders.   
:(

We have had horrible federal management, unbelievably inconsistent messaging across the USA, and a group of citizens that are either confused or not quite savvy on this pandemic's killing potential. 

Doesn't matter now.   EU is telling the world the real deal in the USA.  
I will know the USA is scoring some meaningful victories when the EU puts the USA on the travel list. 
Until we are on that list, POTUS will get most of the blame.  
That's just leadership reality.   Whether or not he deserves that blame is a political question, but historically the leader of the country gets the blame in situations like this.

In other news.....I understand CIF will have a fall sport status/viability meeting on July 20th for CA HS sports.   My guess is the NCAA probably has a similar date for the organization to check-in on COVID's status and then make a call.  Does anyone know if the NCAA has a meeting planned?
 
If mid-July is our go/no-go status check for sports, then I guess we will see some organizations discontinuing their seasons in just a few weeks.

[Farm93]

Goose, 
You are stuck in the logistics a bit.   

On tests 
Korea's tests.
Germany's tests.
Thailand's tests.
New York's tests.
Any place with a test in February would have been fine.  NY had to beg to use their testing resources, and it took weeks for the Federal government to allow that to happen.   Any viable test from with anyone with a test would have been great.   And they definitely existed because several countries around the world were testing at decent scale when the CDC was barely testing anyone.
That's all in the past now anyway.
Big F on prep for crisis management. 
Bigger F on crisis management.
Check, check.

We are where we are, and it doesn't look good IMHO.

Even with everything going on there are gym owners in AZ suing to stay open today.    And bars in Texas planning to ignore health orders because they need to pay their bills.
Fantastic.  And these types are open about the defiance.   How many others will just silently defy orders.   
:(

We have had horrible federal management, unbelievably inconsistent messaging across the USA, and a group of citizens that are either confused or not quite savvy on this pandemic's killing potential. 

Doesn't matter now.   EU is telling the world the real deal in the USA.  
I will know the USA is scoring some meaningful victories when the EU puts the USA on the travel list. 
Until we are on that list, POTUS will get most of the blame.  
That's just leadership reality.   Whether or not he deserves that blame is a political question, but historically the leader of the country gets the blame in situations like this.

In other news.....I understand CIF will have a fall sport status/viability meeting on July 20th for CA HS sports.   My guess is the NCAA probably has a similar date for the organization to check-in on COVID's status and then make a call.  Does anyone know if the NCAA has a meeting planned?
 
If mid-July is our go/no-go status check for sports, then I guess we will see some organizations discontinuing their seasons in just a few weeks.

[Snorlax94]

Well, because it has been suggested that nothing could have be done differently at the federal level, here is Joe Biden listing what he would do differently, what he does differently (like wearing a mask), and what he has been saying should be done differently since January.

We posted Trump’s guideline/plans when those were released, so I think it’s fair to post an opposing plan to the current one.

Some highlights:
Greater use of the DPA to create PPE
Direct federal funds for more testing, not less
Letting the CDC release its guidelines
Then, actually use those guidelines to determine which states should open, and when
The federal government should lead a national program to build an army of contact tracers
Require masks and actually model that behavior
Work with other nations on a global response
Provide transparency into how any vaccine would be distributed to show they are prepared and that vaccines will be distributed equitably
Restore America’s support for and efforts with the World Health Organization

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout...xPpU&t=14m

[Snorlax94]

Well, because it has been suggested that nothing could have be done differently at the federal level, here is Joe Biden listing what he would do differently, what he does differently (like wearing a mask), and what he has been saying should be done differently since January.

We posted Trump’s guideline/plans when those were released, so I think it’s fair to post an opposing plan to the current one.

Some highlights:
Greater use of the DPA to create PPE
Direct federal funds for more testing, not less
Letting the CDC release its guidelines
Then, actually use those guidelines to determine which states should open, and when
The federal government should lead a national program to build an army of contact tracers
Require masks and actually model that behavior
Work with other nations on a global response
Provide transparency into how any vaccine would be distributed to show they are prepared and that vaccines will be distributed equitably
Restore America’s support for and efforts with the World Health Organization

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout...xPpU&t=14m

[OutsiderFan]

As Laurie Garrett said, Biden offers (better) tactics, but no clear objectives and therefore no strategy to meet it. 

My goal would be to track every case and my strategy would be awareness of where virus is to drive it out of existence. I would make my strategy about testing, contact tracing and setup quarantine venues for positive tested individuals. I would totally reject vaccine development as my solution. It’s way too expensive. The exercise takes too many people off working on other stuff, and we don’t know if one will work effectively, if we can distribute enough of it, or if enough people will take it to create herd immunity. I personally have never had a flu shot and have never had a bad case of flu. I’m not taking any Covid vaccine that I know has been rushed into production. 

If you have a positive test, the government will pay for your quarantine if you can’t isolate at home. You will be required to stay for two weeks, and you’d receive a $500 tax credit for staying 3 weeks. 

I’d also do what I thin it was Singapore did with its contact tracing app. Any time you enter a venue, you must check in on your phone to enter. This way if a positive case is identified, everyone who also checked in at the same place can be notified and isolate or quarantine.

I’d then do randomized population testing in every county in the country to assess where the virus is. This would be a permanent practice until the virus is gone for 3 months.

Masks would be required when around others and when inside, as long as a certain percentage of population was testing positive. After it goes below, mask requirements are dropped. All restrictions would be tied to numbers. You want us to open schools? Get our numbers to x point. Want us to open inside dining? Get us to y point.

Use the DPA to make equipment as needed to support the strategy and align all federal resources to execute. Pass another funding bill and make direct payments to individuals who have lost income. The spending that occurs will allow local governments to collect more tax dollars so they can stay afloat.

Or something like this.

[OutsiderFan]

As Laurie Garrett said, Biden offers (better) tactics, but no clear objectives and therefore no strategy to meet it. 

My goal would be to track every case and my strategy would be awareness of where virus is to drive it out of existence. I would make my strategy about testing, contact tracing and setup quarantine venues for positive tested individuals. I would totally reject vaccine development as my solution. It’s way too expensive. The exercise takes too many people off working on other stuff, and we don’t know if one will work effectively, if we can distribute enough of it, or if enough people will take it to create herd immunity. I personally have never had a flu shot and have never had a bad case of flu. I’m not taking any Covid vaccine that I know has been rushed into production. 

If you have a positive test, the government will pay for your quarantine if you can’t isolate at home. You will be required to stay for two weeks, and you’d receive a $500 tax credit for staying 3 weeks. 

I’d also do what I thin it was Singapore did with its contact tracing app. Any time you enter a venue, you must check in on your phone to enter. This way if a positive case is identified, everyone who also checked in at the same place can be notified and isolate or quarantine.

I’d then do randomized population testing in every county in the country to assess where the virus is. This would be a permanent practice until the virus is gone for 3 months.

Masks would be required when around others and when inside, as long as a certain percentage of population was testing positive. After it goes below, mask requirements are dropped. All restrictions would be tied to numbers. You want us to open schools? Get our numbers to x point. Want us to open inside dining? Get us to y point.

Use the DPA to make equipment as needed to support the strategy and align all federal resources to execute. Pass another funding bill and make direct payments to individuals who have lost income. The spending that occurs will allow local governments to collect more tax dollars so they can stay afloat.

Or something like this.

[Goose]

I have seen many references to using the DPA to procure items that are needed, such as PPE. Can anybody show me an example of a firm that refused to take a contract from the Government to make such an item? I know of at least one manufacturer who accepted such a contract even though it wasn't really in their wheelhouse. Right now, with the economy the way it is, anything that keeps money flowing in is a good contract even if it isn't highly profitable. Unless there are such examples, I think all this repeated citing of the DPA is a read herring.

I also know that there are DOD priority ratings (based on other legislation) that can force a company to build anything they are capable of building. With the correct paperwork, that project becomes the highest priority project in the company, no matter what else is going on.  The Government can (and sometimes does) station people in the contractors facility to ensure compliance. It is interesting to watch the government people squabble with each other when you have two or more DX projects going. These projects usually start without an actually negotiated contract in place. You get a "letter contract", and sometimes the job is actually finished before there is a "real" contract. In theory, the profit is limited, but companies usually do pretty well on them. It can really mess up your other customers though, which are often also the government. YMMV.

In point of fact, the arguably greatest use of the DPA during WWII was to STOP companies from doing things. The example most often cited is ALCO wanting to continue building diesel locomotives, but the Government needing to reduce diesel locomotive production because the diesel engines were needed elsewhere. ALCO also built steam engines. EMD didn't, so all the diesel production was at EMD and ALCO was forced to just build steam engines. Many believe that that decision ultimately doomed ALCO, although it took a while. Similarly, the DPA was used to force aircraft manufactures to manufacture planes they didn't design instead of those that they did. It was also used to prevent acceptance of contracts from other nations (like the UK) if production of stuff for the US would be impacted.

[Goose]

I have seen many references to using the DPA to procure items that are needed, such as PPE. Can anybody show me an example of a firm that refused to take a contract from the Government to make such an item? I know of at least one manufacturer who accepted such a contract even though it wasn't really in their wheelhouse. Right now, with the economy the way it is, anything that keeps money flowing in is a good contract even if it isn't highly profitable. Unless there are such examples, I think all this repeated citing of the DPA is a read herring.

I also know that there are DOD priority ratings (based on other legislation) that can force a company to build anything they are capable of building. With the correct paperwork, that project becomes the highest priority project in the company, no matter what else is going on.  The Government can (and sometimes does) station people in the contractors facility to ensure compliance. It is interesting to watch the government people squabble with each other when you have two or more DX projects going. These projects usually start without an actually negotiated contract in place. You get a "letter contract", and sometimes the job is actually finished before there is a "real" contract. In theory, the profit is limited, but companies usually do pretty well on them. It can really mess up your other customers though, which are often also the government. YMMV.

In point of fact, the arguably greatest use of the DPA during WWII was to STOP companies from doing things. The example most often cited is ALCO wanting to continue building diesel locomotives, but the Government needing to reduce diesel locomotive production because the diesel engines were needed elsewhere. ALCO also built steam engines. EMD didn't, so all the diesel production was at EMD and ALCO was forced to just build steam engines. Many believe that that decision ultimately doomed ALCO, although it took a while. Similarly, the DPA was used to force aircraft manufactures to manufacture planes they didn't design instead of those that they did. It was also used to prevent acceptance of contracts from other nations (like the UK) if production of stuff for the US would be impacted.