BBC: China pneumonia outbreak: COVID-19 Global Pandemic

[Springfield]

2 hours ago, LD0506 said:

Yeah cause it’s their job. They can always quit if they don’t want the risk.

 

**** that tweet.

[China]

Twitter censored tweets critical of India’s handling of the pandemic at its government’s request

 

Twitter has removed more than 50 tweets critical of the Indian government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, and did so at the request of the Indian government. First reported by Indian news site MediaNama, the Indian government sent Twitter an emergency order on Friday to censor 52 tweets, according to a disclosure notice on the Lumen database. The censored accounts include a sitting member of India’s Parliament, two filmmakers, an actor, and a West Bengal state minister.

 

A Twitter spokesperson said in an email to The Verge that the company may make certain tweets unable to be viewed by people within India if the tweets violate local law. Twitter says it notified account holders before it withheld content to make them aware that the action was taken in response to a legal request from the government of India.

 

“When we receive a valid legal request, we review it under both the Twitter Rules and local law. If the content violates Twitter’s Rules, the content will be removed from the service,” according to the Twitter spokesperson. “If it is determined to be illegal in a particular jurisdiction, but not in violation of the Twitter Rules, we may withhold access to the content in India only. In all cases, we notify the account holder directly so they’re aware that we’ve received a legal order pertaining to the account.”

 

It isn’t the first time that Twitter has bowed to pressure from the Indian government. During protests by farmers in February, the company permanently blocked more than 500 accounts and removed others from being visible within India. 

 

Click on the link for the full article

Edited April 26, 2021 by China

[mammajamma]

On 4/24/2021 at 2:30 PM, The Evil Genius said:

 

Perhaps..and I can see that argument.

 

Were those high risk people the super spreaders here? 

its a good point that is was younger, less-vulnerable people spreading it, but the articles you posted (cases/deaths WAY down over the last couple of months) are pretty good proof that we did it the right way, right?

[The Evil Genius]

There is really nothing good about 572k and growing deaths here. But it's not even that as we've had 32m+ cases of it so far. About 10% of our population. 

 

The UK, where they did (I believe) roll our first shots to nearly anyone who wanted it, kept they case load to a little less than 7% of their population.  Sadly their mortailty rate was higher bust I suspect that has other factors in play. 

 

That possible 3% less cases in the US would have equates to 100k less infections and 1800 less deaths (if I'm doing the math right).

 

Edited April 26, 2021 by The Evil Genius

[gbear]

I am not sure about the deaths from your math.  I believe the percentage of COVID positive cases might have been kept down, but I am not sure about the deaths because while the percent of cases needing hospitalization have been fairly constant over the past year, we have gotten better at keeping patients alive.  So the question is whether the 3% less cases would have come at the beginning or end of the past year.  I suspect the savings in terms of spread would have been more and more through hte year as the case in march that didn't get it also didn't spread to 1.2 new patients who didn't each spread it to 1.2 more patients (yes I know 1.2 patients isn't a real thing, but 5 cases wouldn't become 6).  Thus, the 3 percent saved from getting the illness probably would not have the same percentage of them die.

 

Still, the point about less deaths is valid.

Edited April 26, 2021 by gbear

[TD_washingtonredskins]

On 4/24/2021 at 8:44 PM, Springfield said:

Yeah cause it’s their job. They can always quit if they don’t want the risk.

 

**** that tweet.

 

I tend to agree with you on this. I get economics and the idea of supply & demand...but complaining and striking right after you were needed in a job you chose is pretty ****ty. 

[Larry]

I'm shocked that someone posting a tweet in which someone predicted that, after working for a year in a work environment in which they literally risked their lives, without the normal support or equipment, if people wait till after the crisis has subsided, and then attempt to improve things, they will be labeled as greedy, would produce responses demonstrating that the tweet was correct.  

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Not as many will be “complaining” as you might suspect.  After all, 3500 nurses have died from COVID in the last year.

[The Evil Genius]

1 hour ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Not as many will be “complaining” as you might suspect.  After all, 3500 nurses have died from COVID in the last year.

 

Dealing with ungrateful dumb Americans (and employers who treat them like plug and replace widgets) is likely a comorbidity.

Edited April 26, 2021 by The Evil Genius

[Hersh]

On 4/24/2021 at 8:44 PM, Springfield said:

Yeah cause it’s their job. They can always quit if they don’t want the risk.

 

**** that tweet.

 

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I tend to agree with you on this. I get economics and the idea of supply & demand...but complaining and striking right after you were needed in a job you chose is pretty ****ty. 

 

Are y'all being serious here? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were joking and that you actually would understand where nurses are coming from. 

[Springfield]

15 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

 

Are y'all being serious here? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were joking and that you actually would understand where nurses are coming from. 

Look, I feel for the front line nurses. They probably worked long hours during a global pandemic which added lots of stress. Sure.

 

But you’re gonna strike when you don’t get a payday afterwords? That’s bogus.

 

They were doing their jobs just like delivery drivers, warehouse workers, grocery store workers and first responders. They, along with the aforementioned, helped keep this country afloat in a dangerous and scary time. That’s awesome. Nurses jobs are to deal with sick people, what are we supposed to do for them when this is all over?

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I'm with @Springfield here and my mom was a nurse until she retired. I hate the strong-arm game...a lot. I hate how teachers unions have held school systems hostage and I'd be pissed if nurses pulled something like this too. Now, that doesn't mean that there can't be a conversation about compensation or whatever. But a strike would be ****ty. 

 

As @Springfield mentioned...you were essentially called upon to perform your duties. Something you thought might always be needed. Whether that's a virus, a natural disaster, a terrorist attack, whatever...these things happen and that's part of what you knew was in your job description. It doesn't devalue what they did. It doesn't make their efforts any less heroic. But it also doesn't give them the right to strike. 

 

One of my job duties is to fire people and that sucks. Sometimes I need to fire good people who have families and this quite literally ruins their life for a while. When I need to do that, I don't walk into the CEO's office and refuse to work again until I have some condition met. An unpleasant aspect of my job is still an aspect of my job. And I'm compensated for that possibility even during all the months, years, decades that it's not needed. 

[Sticksboi05]

 

This is GREAT news and months overdue frankly. The science has been there for like 9 months that outdoor transmission is extremely low and only in the case of sustained contact. Wearing masks walking down the street past people has done zero to change the trajectory of the pandemic and has probably contributed to pandemic fatigue in some way. It's less annoying to have to put masks on indoors where they make a difference if you could behave normally on the way to the restaurant.

[Hersh]

So nurses that had to be on the front lines with less than adequate gear, that were there with people dying far more often than normal when loved ones couldn't be there, that had to social distance from their own families or go through extreme measures to keep their families safe, "were essentially called upon to perform their duties." 

 

Sorry, but firing someone doesn't equal what they want through. It's a super bad look to try to somehow equate the two as if you were risking your own health. 

 

I hope y'all decide to spend some time reflecting on your positions cause they are some tone deaf, selfish positions. I mean "they held the country together but they shouldn't get **** for it" is one of those positions. I'm in favor of massive student debt cancellations for nurses that worked during the pandemic and I'd be happy if some kind of financial reward was given to others that had to work and did hold the country together. 

 

[Springfield]

1 minute ago, Hersh said:

So nurses that had to be on the front lines with less than adequate gear, that were there with people dying far more often than normal when loved ones couldn't be there, that had to social distance from their own families or go through extreme measures to keep their families safe, "were essentially called upon to perform their duties." 

 

Sorry, but firing someone doesn't equal what they want through. It's a super bad look to try to somehow equate the two as if you were risking your own health. 

 

I hope y'all decide to spend some time reflecting on your positions cause they are some tone deaf, selfish positions. I mean "they held the country together but they shouldn't get **** for it" is one of those positions. I'm in favor of massive student debt cancellations for nurses that worked during the pandemic and I'd be happy if some kind of financial reward was given to others that had to work and did hold the country together. 

 

You know what’s selfish? Refusing to help sick people because you don’t get your way financially after an unprecedented global pandemic.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 minute ago, Hersh said:

So nurses that had to be on the front lines with less than adequate gear, that were there with people dying far more often than normal when loved ones couldn't be there, that had to social distance from their own families or go through extreme measures to keep their families safe, "were essentially called upon to perform their duties." 

 

Sorry, but firing someone doesn't equal what they want through. It's a super bad look to try to somehow equate the two as if you were risking your own health. 

 

I hope y'all decide to spend some time reflecting on your positions cause they are some tone deaf, selfish positions. I mean "they held the country together but they shouldn't get **** for it" is one of those positions. I'm in favor of massive student debt cancellations for nurses that worked during the pandemic and I'd be happy if some kind of financial reward was given to others that had to work and did hold the country together. 

 

I'd agree that firing someone isn't on the same level, so I apologize for the analogy. And, I did say that I think a conversation about additional perks or rewards is perfectly reasonable. But if they strike, that's bull**** to me. If people want to cancel debt or something, great. I just think it's a "super bad look" to do your job then try to hold your community hostage if you don't get some extra reward for it. 

 

And, I'm growing so tired of the tactic you used above @Hersh (not just by you, of course). The whole "go back and reflect on your tone deaf opinions" schtick is so annoying. I didn't say anything awful. I didn't call for all nurses to be rounded up and shot. I simply said that if their next move after being heroic was to strike, I'd consider that ****ed up. We all need to tone down the rhetoric and condescension. Can't we just express our differing opinions without the soapbox? 

[Hersh]

5 minutes ago, Springfield said:

You know what’s selfish? Refusing to help sick people because you don’t get your way financially after an unprecedented global pandemic.

 

When should they demand changes and what should they do if things don't change? 

3 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I'd agree that firing someone isn't on the same level, so I apologize for the analogy. And, I did say that I think a conversation about additional perks or rewards is perfectly reasonable. But if they strike, that's bull**** to me. If people want to cancel debt or something, great. I just think it's a "super bad look" to do your job then try to hold your community hostage if you don't get some extra reward for it. 

 

And, I'm growing so tired of the tactic you used above @Hersh (not just by you, of course). The whole "go back and reflect on your tone deaf opinions" schtick is so annoying. I didn't say anything awful. I didn't call for all nurses to be rounded up and shot. I simply said that if their next move after being heroic was to strike, I'd consider that ****ed up. We all need to tone down the rhetoric and condescension. Can't we just express our differing opinions without the soapbox? 

 

I should've quoted you at the same time, but when should they demand changes and what should they do if things don't change? Why is it ****ed up strike if they don't get changes? 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

4 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

When should they demand changes and what should they do if things don't change? 

 

I should've quoted you at the same time, but when should they demand changes and what should they do if things don't change? Why is it ****ed up strike if they don't get changes? 

Because, to me, it's basically undoing the good they've just done. If they were going to strike for systemic or fundamental issues with their working situation, I would look at it differently. But this, to me, is like an athlete having a career year then demanding the final 4 years of his 5-year contract be redone. I don't think they should strike to cash in or be rewarded for the good that they did. That negates the good that they did to an extent in my mind. 

[Springfield]

First off. What are their demands? Cause according to that tweet, it makes it seem like they should get more money any time there is an unprecedented global pandemic. I’m not against that, but what quantifies that?

 

Are they against the forced overtime? As I understand it, nurses get forced into overtime a lot during times of need.

 

I can’t imagine that being a nurse during the pandemic is very pleasant, but how does this compare to regular nursing, say, during flu season? For instance, there are currently 194 hospitalized patients in the entire northern region of VA. I don’t know what that breaks down per hospital but I can’t imagine that it’s many per hospital. At the height of the pandemic in NOVA it was about 700 people total hospitalized.

 

Does that mean that working during widespread flu seasons will merit some sort of additional hazard pay? I hate to compare to two, but again, nurses are trained in dealing with sick people. I think, at this point, a year into it, nurses can deal with Covid patients fine.

[Hersh]

I would generally agree with both of you if it wasn't a once in a century event. I don't think widespread flu is the equivalent. In general, nurses certainly are trained in dealing with sick people but with the expectation that they would have all the PPE they need and they generally know what they are dealing with early on if there is some kind of exposure. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, Hersh said:

I would generally agree with both of you if it wasn't a once in a century event. I don't think widespread flu is the equivalent. In general, nurses certainly are trained in dealing with sick people but with the expectation that they would have all the PPE they need and they generally know what they are dealing with early on if there is some kind of exposure. 

I guess we need to see what actually happens, by whom, and what the demands are. I guess it's a little unfair that we're speculating what a group is going to do based on someone else speculating how we'd react to that group

 

If certain nurses who got sick, have some sort of PTSD, etc. ask to be made whole then I am going to be supportive. If a large group of nurses use this as a catalyst to be opportunistic and selfish, I won't. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

In the car game, we basically emptied the clip on spiffs and bonuses to keep our staff healthy, intact and well-compensated over the last year.   And there was some PPP involved, but not that much.

 

Very few got sick.

Nobody died.
We didn’t spend a whole lot of time talking about anybody being “selfish”.

This March was the 3rd most profitable month since 2009.  Folks got PAID.

 

Anyway, find good people and pay them.  Watch what happens.

 

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

[Hersh]

Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said:

I guess we need to see what actually happens, by whom, and what the demands are. I guess it's a little unfair that we're speculating what a group is going to do based on someone else speculating how we'd react to that group

 

If certain nurses who got sick, have some sort of PTSD, etc. ask to be made whole then I am going to be supportive. If a large group of nurses use this as a catalyst to be opportunistic and selfish, I won't. 

 

Let me address one thing too. The reason I mentioned reflecting on it is because the expectations here are high for the both of you. I think 90% of the people here are thoughtful compassionate people so that's my expectation. If I see a take that seems out of line from what I know about one of you totally anonymous friends, I will say something. 

I was speculating too and you are right, we should wait and see what is wanted. I'm hoping that the government is a bit proactive on that front. Would be a nice change. Hell, just waive all their taxes for a couple years plus a little student debt relief and it's done. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

25 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

Let me address one thing too. The reason I mentioned reflecting on it is because the expectations here are high for the both of you. I think 90% of the people here are thoughtful compassionate people so that's my expectation. If I see a take that seems out of line from what I know about one of you totally anonymous friends, I will say something. 

I was speculating too and you are right, we should wait and see what is wanted. I'm hoping that the government is a bit proactive on that front. Would be a nice change. Hell, just waive all their taxes for a couple years plus a little student debt relief and it's done. 

[The Evil Genius]

When asked/required/ordered to work in hazardous duty situations that are beyond the normal standards of the job, the expectation is that American workers will be given extra benefits and proper protections.

 

If nurses or anyone else having to do essential work around highly infectious people are asking for both, I cannot fault that. That seems like the definition of hazardous duty to me.