COVID 19 refuse to fly?
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 553
COVID 19 refuse to fly?
All guidelines point to the pointlessness of operating commercial flights, particularly to vacation destinations.
Begs the question, who is going to be the first to refuse to fly based on federal, state, and local guidelines?
Begs the question, who is going to be the first to refuse to fly based on federal, state, and local guidelines?
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2020
Posts: 177
Why don't you? Be our canary in the coal mine, so to speak. If you've got the conviction to, that is.
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,539
California has a way lower percentage of cases than many states. Let’s stick to the facts.
New York has 4,597 (about half of the US total). Washington has 1,187. Both have smaller populations than California.
California has 652 cases but has a population of 40 million. That doesn’t even put it in the top 10 states for infections per population.
Georgia has 262. Population 10 million.
Illinois has 288. Population 12 million.
Louisiana has 261. Population 4.5 million.
New Jersey has 427. Population 8.8 million.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, Wisconsin, and several more because I don’t care to keep doing the math all have a higher percentage of infections per population.
CDC site for infections per state:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ses-in-us.html
Wikipedia site for population per state:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._by_population
New York has 4,597 (about half of the US total). Washington has 1,187. Both have smaller populations than California.
California has 652 cases but has a population of 40 million. That doesn’t even put it in the top 10 states for infections per population.
Georgia has 262. Population 10 million.
Illinois has 288. Population 12 million.
Louisiana has 261. Population 4.5 million.
New Jersey has 427. Population 8.8 million.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, Wisconsin, and several more because I don’t care to keep doing the math all have a higher percentage of infections per population.
CDC site for infections per state:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ses-in-us.html
Wikipedia site for population per state:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._by_population
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Retired
Posts: 651
California has a way lower percentage of cases than many states. Let’s stick to the facts.
New York has 4,597 (about half of the US total). Washington has 1,187. Both have smaller populations than California.
California has 652 cases but has a population of 40 million. That doesn’t even put it in the top 10 states for infections per population.
Georgia has 262. Population 10 million.
Illinois has 288. Population 12 million.
Louisiana has 261. Population 4.5 million.
New Jersey has 427. Population 8.8 million.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, Wisconsin, and several more because I don’t care to keep doing the math all have a higher percentage of infections per population.
CDC site for infections per state:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ses-in-us.html
Wikipedia site for population per state:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._by_population
New York has 4,597 (about half of the US total). Washington has 1,187. Both have smaller populations than California.
California has 652 cases but has a population of 40 million. That doesn’t even put it in the top 10 states for infections per population.
Georgia has 262. Population 10 million.
Illinois has 288. Population 12 million.
Louisiana has 261. Population 4.5 million.
New Jersey has 427. Population 8.8 million.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, Wisconsin, and several more because I don’t care to keep doing the math all have a higher percentage of infections per population.
CDC site for infections per state:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ses-in-us.html
Wikipedia site for population per state:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._by_population
A family member is a physician in a medical center in a major metropolitan area. They have people in the ICU on ventilators who are symptomatic, but as of yesterday they are not allowed to test them because the local requirement is symptomatic and known contact with someone who tested positive. And with no one other than the rich and famous being tested it creates a Catch-22 for most of the population.
This is in a state that the CDC shows with less than 100 cases.
Last edited by 742Dash; 03-20-2020 at 04:29 AM. Reason: words
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2017
Posts: 129
Correction
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
captain_drew
Flight Schools and Training
38
12-05-2012 08:29 AM