Kansas Crimson

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:25 pm https://www.summitdaily.com/news/8-brec ... ronavirus/

8 Breckenridge city market employees test positive for coronavirus

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:35 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 12:53 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 12:01 pm

I should learn to code, huh?

Meat packing plants are likely going to be hiring. Or maybe get hired on with a butcher, they're about to see a boon in business.

Amazon is hiring, I assume FedEx and UPS are as well.

A lot of us are going to have to pivot in terms of our careers.

If you were really feeling threatened yourself, you wouldn't be so glib about putting your PhD to use cutting meat or delivering packages, nor would you confuse a job with a career.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:39 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:25 pm https://www.summitdaily.com/news/8-brec ... ronavirus/

8 Breckenridge city market employees test positive for coronavirus

Strangely, I saw no mention of whether any of said employees were symptomatic. Welp, better shut down Colorado until after the first of the year just to be safe!

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:40 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:35 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 12:53 pm

Meat packing plants are likely going to be hiring. Or maybe get hired on with a butcher, they're about to see a boon in business.

Amazon is hiring, I assume FedEx and UPS are as well.

A lot of us are going to have to pivot in terms of our careers.

If you were really feeling threatened yourself, you wouldn't be so glib about putting your PhD to use cutting meat or delivering packages, nor would you confuse a job with a career.

You do what you have to do. Each of us has a certain amount of money stored away that will last for a finite period of time if we have no income. Hell yeah I'd work at FedEx or UPS if it came to that. I've worked way worse jobs than that before. A career change likely requires some schooling or extended training and A) I gotta pay the bills while doing that and B) unless Bernie Sanders runs as an independent and wins the election in November then that schooling or training is going to be expensive.

This pandemic should have everyone assessing the vulnerabilities of their career choices as well as their current digital capabilities. "What is the likelihood of your job surviving through a pandemic" was certainly not one of the risk factors I considered when I sat down and chose my current career path but it will absolutely be a consideration if I ever choose to alter or change this path. And I will damn sure be investing some money in my home IT equipment this year. I need to build a new PC and buy an additional monitor as well as upgrade our WIFI. This has exposed some weaknesses in my current home hardware that will be addressed when our income gets back to normal again. We're able to do what we need but we take on a little water on really busy days when all four of us are pushing the bandwidth hard.

sdoyel wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 11:05 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:40 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:35 pm

If you were really feeling threatened yourself, you wouldn't be so glib about putting your PhD to use cutting meat or delivering packages, nor would you confuse a job with a career.

You do what you have to do. Each of us has a certain amount of money stored away that will last for a finite period of time if we have no income. Hell yeah I'd work at FedEx or UPS if it came to that. I've worked way worse jobs than that before. A career change likely requires some schooling or extended training and A) I gotta pay the bills while doing that and B) unless Bernie Sanders runs as an independent and wins the election in November then that schooling or training is going to be expensive.

This pandemic should have everyone assessing the vulnerabilities of their career choices as well as their current digital capabilities. "What is the likelihood of your job surviving through a pandemic" was certainly not one of the risk factors I considered when I sat down and chose my current career path but it will absolutely be a consideration if I ever choose to alter or change this path. And I will damn sure be investing some money in my home IT equipment this year. I need to build a new PC and buy an additional monitor as well as upgrade our WIFI. This has exposed some weaknesses in my current home hardware that will be addressed when our income gets back to normal again. We're able to do what we need but we take on a little water on really busy days when all four of us are pushing the bandwidth hard.

I’m so damn lucky when it comes to tech in my house. Last Fall I upgraded a decade-old personal laptop, then also invested in a 4K monitor setup. Literally this January I upped our wifi speed and capability in the house.

Working from home (temporarily) in the architecture industry, I look back and wonder what gave me the foresight to make those upgrades. Necessity or luck as I first alluded to?

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:36 pm This dude gets it:

https://www.thekansan.com/opinion/20200 ... 9-strategy

...In general comparison to influenza, which itself varies widely from year to year, COVID is maybe twice as dangerous (death rate of 0.2% instead of 0.1%), and three times as likely to have no symptoms at all (60% to 20%). Nobody has any immunity from past infection or vaccination...

At that point it becomes clear that the Swedish strategy, perhaps with more aggressive isolation of older, sicker, unemployed citizens, would have allowed the economy to pretty much go on as usual. And we still would have had March Madness to amuse ourselves as we practiced modest social isolation to “flatten the curve” of hospital admissions.

This hypothetical scenario, now past, makes the current “debate” about re-opening the economy look pretty silly. Just admit we made a mistake, with inadequate information and the best of intentions, isolate the high-risk population until herd immunity emerges, and let people go back to work.

Admitting honest mistakes is admirable and defensible, although difficult for politicians...

Doug Iliff, MD, FAAFP, has been a family physician in Topeka for 34 years.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:31 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:39 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Apr 29, 2020 9:25 pm https://www.summitdaily.com/news/8-brec ... ronavirus/

8 Breckenridge city market employees test positive for coronavirus

Strangely, I saw no mention of whether any of said employees were symptomatic. Welp, better shut down Colorado until after the first of the year just to be safe!

Akshully, Colorado is conducting an experiment very similar to Georgia's.

But, strangely, no Darwin pics for Jared Polis.

Wonder why?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 10:40 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:23 pm

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:05 pm

Geezer wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 2:59 pm Over a million cases and 58,000 dead

In the blink of an eye, it will have killed more Americans, 58,220, than died in the Vietnam War in 20 years, from 1955 to 1975.

Very sad.

No tears for the ~55,000 Americans who die of the regular flu every year, though? I'm guessing the number of suicides in the U.S. this year will be well above the normal 47,000 as well.

Feral wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 10:28 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:36 pm This dude gets it:

https://www.thekansan.com/opinion/20200 ... 9-strategy

...In general comparison to influenza, which itself varies widely from year to year, COVID is maybe twice as dangerous (death rate of 0.2% instead of 0.1%), and three times as likely to have no symptoms at all (60% to 20%). Nobody has any immunity from past infection or vaccination...

At that point it becomes clear that the Swedish strategy, perhaps with more aggressive isolation of older, sicker, unemployed citizens, would have allowed the economy to pretty much go on as usual. And we still would have had March Madness to amuse ourselves as we practiced modest social isolation to “flatten the curve” of hospital admissions.

This hypothetical scenario, now past, makes the current “debate” about re-opening the economy look pretty silly. Just admit we made a mistake, with inadequate information and the best of intentions, isolate the high-risk population until herd immunity emerges, and let people go back to work.

Admitting honest mistakes is admirable and defensible, although difficult for politicians...

Doug Iliff, MD, FAAFP, has been a family physician in Topeka for 34 years.

Somebody isn't a fan:

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:25 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:23 pm

Feral wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:05 pm

In the blink of an eye, it will have killed more Americans, 58,220, than died in the Vietnam War in 20 years, from 1955 to 1975.

Very sad.

No tears for the ~55,000 Americans who die of the regular flu every year, though? I'm guessing the number of suicides in the U.S. this year will be well above the normal 47,000 as well.

That's 55,000 dead despite zero efforts to mitigate outside of the flu vaccine that sorta kinda protects some people if they happen to nail the vaccine perfectly.

We're at 60,000 now despite massive mitigation efforts. What would that number be if we strolled along without closing anything at all? 200,000? More? Less? I am glad we didn't have to find out. So can we drop the whole "but what about the flu" shtick?

As for suicides, I would love to mitigate those numbers more but that would require more money be spent on social programs that you'll likely find to be redundant wastes of money so....

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:59 am
My point, again, is that you are elevating one cause of death over another. More people than normal will end up dying of suicide and drug overdoses due to the economic and social ramifications of the lockdowns. Those are still deaths. They are still tragic, yet you seem willing to accept those as the price of having fewer deaths attributable to COVID-19. I am just asking that we look at the whole picture and map out a measured response that acknowledges that drastic measures may prevent deaths from one cause but end up causing more deaths from another.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:59 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:25 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:23 pm

No tears for the ~55,000 Americans who die of the regular flu every year, though? I'm guessing the number of suicides in the U.S. this year will be well above the normal 47,000 as well.

That's 55,000 dead despite zero efforts to mitigate outside of the flu vaccine that sorta kinda protects some people if they happen to nail the vaccine perfectly.

We're at 60,000 now despite massive mitigation efforts. What would that number be if we strolled along without closing anything at all? 200,000? More? Less? I am glad we didn't have to find out. So can we drop the whole "but what about the flu" shtick?

As for suicides, I would love to mitigate those numbers more but that would require more money be spent on social programs that you'll likely find to be redundant wastes of money so....

My point, again, is that you are elevating one cause of death over another. More people than normal will end up dying of suicide and drug overdoses due to the economic and social ramifications of the lockdowns. Those are still deaths. They are still tragic, yet you seem willing to accept those as the price of having fewer deaths attributable to COVID-19. I am just asking that we look at the whole picture and map out a measured response that acknowledges that drastic measures may prevent deaths from one cause but end up causing more deaths from another.

Geezer wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:11 am The liberal media is hiding the news from Colorado.