It seems Western countries are incapable of doing this though...

We just don't have severe enough punishments to stop a minority of people from being complete ******s and ****ing it up for everybody else.

If another world war broke out would we all just be paralyzed by these ******s doing whatever they want? I doubt it and we'd quickly implement suitable punishments to stop it...

A couple of summary executions or public floggings would probably be +++++++++EV in terms of total lives saved.

Juk

a full lockdown would be stupid, because there is a 0% chance it works. We don't have the systems in place to allow people to survive under such a thing, even if people actually followed it, which a massive number won't, either because they refuse to out of liberty or because they literally have to leave their house in order for their family to survive. So all we'd get is some lower virus numbers that come right back the second it's over, and many millions of people far far worse off.

I used to think we should be grateful the virus isn't worse because then we'd really be ****ed, but actually this is probably much more optimal in terms of destruction. Because if it was worse people would actually be scared enough they would do **** like wear masks and stay away from other people and have it turn into a politics issue. Instead it's just dangerous enough that its cause for society to be altered but most people aren't concerned about it because it's probably not going to kill them, and long term brain/lung/heart damage isn't something that has an effect on a society built around ignoring long term consequences

I'd snap-book the under on that, largely because I think treatment options have improved and will continue to do so.

For example,

https://c19study.com/

One month of food and any vital medicine is all you'd need though. Heck you can survive off dried beans, rice and water for a month if you have to... 1000s of people survive living in solitary confinement every year.

You could take 1/2 the essential workers (eg: emergency workers, utility workers, ect) to work for this month whilst the other 1/2 shelter with everybody else. Then switch after the month is over.

Now the only problem is the idiots, so you'd have to back this up with really severe punishments - basically treat it as a "at war" situation.

You'd have the added bonus of killing off loads of other infectious diseases in this month too.

Juk

the death rate is significant because it gives a true picture of the severity of the virus.
but you have to take the numbers with a grain of salt as they include other deaths for various reasons. so the count is actually lower but no one knows by how much. but the trend is what is important.
it will have gone down because originally many died in captive situations like old folks homes. but those places are more careful now so it has lessened.
but the majority of those dying are old, or with health issues, including obesity, diabetes, heart, and lung issue, and smokers .

the amount infected is important but that number is so far off that it is only something to give an idea of how the virus is spreading.

True, but once the flu is in full swing, the chances of things getting ugly is pretty high, imo.

Strep, pneumonia....I'd probably take the under for the reason Howard mentioned plus lots of vulnerable dying already but I could still see lots of sick, hospitals overwhelmed and just general destitution. I dont want to change my way of life, but it could simply be a necessity

Excess death data shows we are undercounting by 30% so the count is actually about 30% higher, not lower

There is no way of knowing how many excess deaths are uncaptured corona, and how many are people with other health issues not going to the hospital out of fear, excess drinking due to loneliness/despair over economic issues, etc.

I'm neither going to argue that the corona numbers are higher than the official count, nor lower. I *suspect* that they are a bit higher, because I haven't seen data showing a spike in other causes of death except pneumonia, which seems a good candidate for uncaptured corona, but that's just a guess.

Not a prediction, but looking for a line.

Assuming that coronavirus is still raging and Biden wins the election (neither close to certain, but let's start there), what's the chance Biden wears a mask at the inauguration?

I've got a couple conflicting thoughts on why he would or wouldn't. Interested to hear other's thoughts.

Such a weird thing to speculate on golddog.

Considering we are going to be in the crap zone still either way in Jan, I would say 100%.

I'd also snap-book a bet that this year's flu season here in USA#9 will be the least deadly flu season in the last 20 years.

it figures to be as more people will be wearing masks and also not going out as much so less contact means less flu and colds about. also means more suicides, home violence.

and less pollution, home invasions and burglaries,

and less traffic deaths, some people staying more healthy and eating better and others living through the fast food chains.

the changes and consequences would not be realized for a time to come or ever.

Agree.

Not only are people distancing more but I'm guessing vaccination rate will be at an all time high.

that was me. yes, some cities need lockdown, but they all need masks at a minimum. not just because they slow the spread, but because they visually remind people not to get complacent.
some could, but most need time to prepare their schedules and distribute technology to the students.
this includes seattle school district, which has decided weeks ago to go all virtual.
you can't eat anything in a mask!
i think the way it will work is kiosk ordering and 6' between tables. small parties. wear your mask in the presence of your server. some governors are saying you have to dine with your family. i mean, if that's what it takes...
there needs to be conditions for reopening that remind people not to get complacent.
cosigned

Regarding suicides and domestic viloence Ray mentioned, in the next two months there are going to be most likely hundreds of thousands of people/couples/families that are going to be homeless for the first time in their lives. With no money and no economy. In a pendemic not even close to finished. I can certainly empathize with the sheer desperation some will go through.

It is going to end badly now, especially with this needless lapse in benefits this month. Eviction protection also lapsed. Eesh.

they are enacting where federal compensated housing is exempt from evictions again.

the only people going homeless will be the ones that refuse to pay rent. the govt. is still going to give them some money. and there is plenty of jobs begging to be filled.

but as a landlord myself. if someone doesnt pay rent they have to go. they made the choice not to save up for things and thats cruel but my costs still must be paid. i certainly would make a deal for partial payments but many use this as a way to say im not paying at all.

lol, wow.

Yeah, I'm not sure what caused that idea to pop into my melon.

My first thought was, they'll just have a remote inauguration, no need for masks, just a few people in the room, streamed/over TV.

Then my second thought was, Biden would see this as a way to differentiate himself from the current administration. "Starting today, everything changes, right at the top." So he'd have the event on the steps of the Capitol, but masks required, etc etc.

We're a long ways from that being reality, so idle curiosity on my part.

No

Dining in restaurants should be banned. Period.

gold,

I'm going with a socially-distanced latter on inauguration.

If Trump wins it will be sparsely populated, short of inviting some legit deplorables onto the stage with confederate flag bowties, and motorcycle club jackets & vests.

and the corpse of herman cain

Yea **** all these *******s who didn’t save up for things like a horribly managed pandemic!

A whole lot of a landlords about to have a whole lot of vacancies. Hope they saved up.