Excargodog

The same way as the schools function when the kids get coronaviruses 229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1 - and always have. That’s why the teacher has a box of Kleenex on her desk.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/gene...formation.html

kids get infected all the time. Damn few get through high school without getting Epstein- Barr, the causative agent for mono (generally asymptomatically) since those who get it stay contagious for up to a year - long after they are over the illness and return to school.


https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/208/8/1286/2192838

Having colds or even mono in your K-12 years is extremely common and causes little long term harm. The same can’t be said of not getting an education.

Knobcrk1

“This information applies to common human coronaviruses and should not be confused with coronavirus disease 2019”


What part of this deadly pandemic are you not getting. This isn’t the flu and it’s not mono.

UAL T38 Phlyer

Quote:

Originally Posted by CantTaxiToACS

This message is sponsored by the young folks (sub 25) who were really trying to make it and were months away from launching into the lives we were building. I'm lucky enough to have a full set of four grandparents, all alive and well. Now, I want to protect them as I realize they are vulnerable. But whether or not I (very young person) am out at bars or in stadiums with other young/healthy people, still has ZERO affect on my grandparents. We are smart enough to keep two thoughts in our heads at once.

So, to summarize your thesis:

1. Young people want to make money.

2. You are disadvantaged by lockdowns and distancing.

3. You’re bored. Some are depressed.

4. You are in a low-risk demographic.

5. “Old people” are high-risk, but already have money to live out their lives on.

6. Isolating them protects them.

7. If you socialize, the only risk is to yourself.


Where to begin dismantling this?


1. MOST people, all ages, want to make money.

2. Almost everyone is disadvantaged by lockdowns, distancing, masks, etc.

3. The universal dilemma. It’s why facebook and Netflix exist.

4. Low, but not Zero. In your “Me-centric” viewpoint, you ignore that many people can be asymptomatic carriers...and SPREADERS.

5. News flash: not all old people “have it made.” Did it occur to you that some could be small (or large) business Owners, watching their life’s work be extinguished?

6. So if that makes you say “See? I should be able to patronize those businesses!”, while in the same breath you say your grandparents must be sheltered...irony.

And, even if you shelter the elderly and have food and groceries delivered to them: who delivered that food? Who cooked it? Who packaged or brought the supplies to the store or restaurant? A young “socializer” who wanted to get on with making a living...and didn't know he was carrying the virus?

7. If a “low risk” person gets sick, they can still spread it. From infection to symptoms can be as much as 14 days.

Spanish flu: estimates vary between 10, 20, 50, and 100 million fatalities. It is estimated 500 million people, a third of the world’s population, was infected. It was a strain of H1N1. The flu usually kills the very young and very old; the Spanish Flu largely killed young adults. Theories differ, but center on cytokine storms (like COVID), or social patterns: young adults were out and about, working, interacting, being mobilized for the war (facilitated long-distance spread), etc.

I looked up your claim. Bloodletting was largely gone by the 1890s, with a few hangers-on.

Herd immunity: for the herd to gain immunity, most everyone has to be exposed. There go the old folks.

Vaccines: it’s true there may never be a vaccine. There are some that mutate so frequently, or as I understand it, RNA types, that are nearly impossible. As pointed out by others, there is still no vaccine for widespread ailments such as cold sores and the “common cold.” And, there are vaccines that work, such as rabies...but are only given to animals, as they are considered risky for humans.

What’s the answer? I don’t pretend to know. A little of everything: vaccine research, distancing, masks, slow herd acquisition, and tactical lockdowns in hot-spots are options.

But to pretend it’s affecting YOU the worst?

Wow.

PS: “My grandparents should NOT be in that bar.” Who says grandparents can’t go out and have a drink every now and then?

CantTaxiToACS

Ok thank you for the lecture. Part of your response was breaking down the food delivery chain to old people and highlighting its flaws. Which is literally what I’m trying to get across here. We can’t dodge the virus, everybody is going to get it eventually. So in the meantime of waiting for a possible vaccine, why should we continue a pseudo-lockdown with plenty of holes in it as you mentioned? I’d be on board 100% for a totalitarian lockdown for two weeks if that meant on the 15th day it would be gone. But that’s not how it works, with hundreds of millions of people in the U.S., someone is gonna be out there spreading it. Just like they are now.

So we need a new plan. Either 100% lockdown to just end it or a try our best to save vulnerable campaign and move on. We’ve taken an in between path of those two things and due to it, young people at the bottom of companies and fresh off college are gonna take the hit of prolonged shutdown. I’m literally volunteering my life to keep the world going.

Excargodog

It is LESS DEADLY for K-12 age kids than the flu.

Knobcrk1

What about the people that the kids come in contact with?? You think everything happens in a vacuum. This isn’t about one person it’s about the community. It’s a pandemic. By the way love how you ignored how your own article told you not to use it for covid19. Oops!!!

NE_Pilot

That's a pretty bold statement. The measurement of GDP is fairly meaningless, it wasn't great when it was first developed and it's even worse now. As calculated in the US, GDP = Consumer Spending + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports. To take one variable, Government Spending, if we decrease that, GDP will go down. Does reduced government spending mean that the country is worse off? Also, if you don't spend then it doesn't count toward GDP. For example; if you clean your own house it has no impact on GDP, but if you pay someone to clean your house it increases GDP. Another example, if your home burns down and you rebuild, that will increase GDP (ceteris paribus), but the burning down of the house is not taken into account in the calculation.

Millennials may be worse off than prior generations, but that article does not provide any compelling evidence to support that claim.

Knobcrk1

I think your issue is you have not fully accepted your predicament yet, it’s not about what’s next. I’m guessing you’ve never been in a downturn, at least professionally. I know it’s hard to believe as a young guy starting out but not everything is rainbows and sunshine. It’s understandable because the way the industry was going it was almost crazy to think there would be any significant problems but that’s how it goes. This isn’t the first time in history where people have had to place their dreams on hold and go live with their parents or share rent in order to survive. I think we’ve become so privileged and entitled that we have no idea how to handle this.

Black Warrior

You, WutFace, and contrails12 need to go hide under a bed and hold hands together and let the rest of the civilized world live their lives.

Knobcrk1

You mean the basement, get it right!